Future Ship
Powering Options
Exploring alternative methods
of ship propulsion
July 2013
Future ship powering options c1
Contents
Foreword2
Glossary76
Executive summary3
References77
1. Introduction8
Appendices78
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Drivers for change9
1.1.1 Carbon emissions
1.1.2 Price of oil
9
10
1.2.1 Technical development
1.2.2Operation
11
13
1.3.1 Emissions control under MARPOL Annex VI
16
The shipping industry11
International regulations15
Global context of shipping17
2. Design options 18
2.1
2.2
2.3
Ship energy considerations18
The ship system19
Energy Efficiency Design Index20
3. Primary propulsion options22
Conventional propulsion options and fuels
3.1 Diesel engines22
3.2Biofuels 26
3.3 Liquid natural gas (LNG)29
3.4 Gas turbines31
Other propulsion technology options
3.5Nuclear33
3.6Batteries41
3.7 Fuel cells43
3.8 Renewable energy sources47
3.9Hydrogen 50
3.10 Anhydrous ammonia51
3.11 Compressed air and liquid nitrogen51
3.12 Hybrid propulsion53
1. Terms of reference
2. Membership of the working group
3. Referee and review group
4. Statement from Vice-President of the European
Commission Siim Kallas and EU Commissioner
for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard, October 2012
5. A ship systems approach
6. Further aspects relating to nuclear merchant ship
propulsion
7. International atomic energy principles and
requirements
8. The energy efficiency design index
9. Calendar for main emission legislation events
2010–2020
10. Potential applicability of measures and options
discussed
78
79
81
82
83
84
89
92
93
94
4. Further Propulsion Considerations54
© Royal Academy of Engineering
July 2013
ISBN: 978-1-909327-01-6
Published by
Royal Academy of Engineering
Prince Philip House
3 Carlton House Terrace
London SW1Y 5DG
Tel: 020 7766 0600
Fax: 020 7930 1549
www.raeng.org.uk
4.1Propulsors54
4.2 Energy-saving devices60
4.3 Hull design and appendages62
4.4 Hull coatings62
4.5 Superconducting electric motors64
4.6 Ship operational considerations66
4.6.1Operational profile
4.6.2Weather routing
4.6.3Plant operational practices
66
66
66
5. Time frame for technical development68
6. Conclusions70
Registered Charity Number: 293074
c2 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 1
Foreword
Shipping is vital to the world economy. It is a critical part of international
import and export markets and supports the global distribution of goods.
As for all industries, concerns about climate change require the reduction
of greenhouse gas emissions from the shipping sector. This entails higher
fuel prices for low sulphur fuels. It means that the industry must prepare
for the new future and investigate alternative, more economic ship
propulsion systems.
Photo by Carmel King
This report, prepared by an expert working group at the Royal Academy
of Engineering, gives a fascinating insight into the development of ship
propulsion systems. It sets out how we got to the current technological
solutions and examines a wide range of possibilities for future ship
powering options. The report presents a thorough review of the range of
technologies, and examines the advantages and limitations of systems
from solar and wind power, through fuel cells to nuclear propulsion.
I believe that this report will be of great benefit to the shipping industry,
offering an overview that is both broad and expertly informed. I hope that
it is made full use of as this important sector joins the challenge to reduce
emissions on a global scale and maintain its competitiveness.
Sir John Parker GBE FREng
President of the Royal Academy of Engineering
2 Royal Academy of Engineering
Executive summary
To achieve
effective
improvements
in efficiency and
reductions in
emissions for
ships, an
integrated
systems
engineering
approach is
required
International agreements on the need to combat climate change, the
fluctuating but generally rising costs of marine fuels which account for
a large proportion of the running costs of a ship, and developments on a
number of other fronts have led many in the industry to question whether
the present methods of ship propulsion are sustainable. These concerns
are enhanced by the introduction of environmental regulations intended
to reduce the impact of climate change – primarily MARPOL Annex VI and
the Energy Efficiency Design Index regulations together with the possible
introduction of carbon taxes.
This report embraces a number of conventional propulsion methods and
fuels and also addresses the newer options of biofuels, liquid natural
gas and hydrogen. In the case of other propulsion options, the subjects
of nuclear propulsion, alternative fuels, batteries, fuel cells, renewable
energy, superconducting electric motors and hybrid propulsion are
considered. Additional propulsion influences are addressed and include
conventional and non-conventional propulsors, magnetohydrodynamic
propulsion, energy-saving devices, hull design and coatings.
There are other factors that affect the emissions from shipping. Avoiding
poor weather by using weather-routing technologies offers important
fuel consumption benefits. Similar benefits are also realisable if ship
speed is optimised during voyages and the crew are trained to understand
the implications of the decisions and actions they take. Furthermore,
the condition of a ship’s machinery has a significant influence on fuel
consumption and emissions performance. There is, therefore, good reason
to keep machinery well-maintained and operated by well-motivated crews.
Studies show that larger ships are more carbon-efficient than smaller
vessels, and it is known that deploying slower ship speeds is an effective
means of reducing emissions. However, de-rating existing engines
installed in ships, or fitting smaller engines than are conventionally
adopted for a given ship size in order to meet environmental design
constraints, can create significant operational risks from under-powering
ships, particularly in poor weather.
Future ship powering options 3
Executive summary
The diesel engine
is currently the
most widespread
of marine prime
movers. It is a
well-understood
technology and a
reliable form of
marine propulsion
and auxiliary
power generation,
with engine
manufacturers
having wellestablished repair
and spare part
networks around
the world
To achieve effective improvements in efficiency and reductions in
emissions for ships, an integrated systems engineering approach is
required. This must embrace all of the elements of naval architecture,
marine and control engineering alongside operation practices. Moreover,
a systems approach must include all of the stakeholder requirements to
achieve a sustainable and optimal design solution. With any propulsion
option it is essential that the overall emission profile of the propulsion
method and the fuel used is properly assessed, so that reductions in
exhaust emissions from ships are not at the cost of increasing harmful
emissions in land-based sectors that produce either the propulsion
machinery or the fuel.
The report identifies a range of short-, medium- and long-term
propulsion options:
Short-term options
The diesel engine is currently the most widespread of marine prime
movers. It is a well-understood technology and a reliable form of marine
propulsion and auxiliary power generation, with engine manufacturers
having well-established repair and spare part networks around the world.
In addition, there is a supply of trained engineers and the education
requirements for future engineers are well-understood, with appropriate
training facilities available. However, diesel engines will continue to
produce CO2 emissions as well as NOX, SOX, volatile organic compounds and
particulate matter.
Liquid natural gas (LNG) can be used in reciprocating engine propulsion
systems and is a known technology with classification society rules for the
fuel systems already in existence. Service experience with dual fuel and
converted diesel engines, although limited at the present time, has been
satisfactory and currently LNG is considerably cheaper than conventional
fuels. LNG, while not free of harmful emissions, has benefits in terms of
CO2, NOX, SOX emissions, given that methane slip is avoided during the
combustion and fuelling processes.
Gas turbines have been successfully used in niche areas of the marine
market and represent a proven high power density propulsion technology.
However, the fuel for aero-derivative gas turbines is expensive when
compared to conventional marine fuels and gas turbine thermal efficiencies
are lower than for slow-speed diesel engines of similar power.
Renewable energy, principally derived from wind and solar origins, is
considered as an augment to the main propulsion and auxiliary power
requirements of a ship.
4 Royal Academy of Engineering
Medium- to long-term options
Biofuels are potential medium-term alternatives to conventional fuels for
diesel engines. Synthetic fuels based on branch-chain higher alcohols and
new types of E-coli as well as algae and other microorganisms are mediumto long-term possibilities, but further work is necessary to examine their
storage, handling, and impacts on health, safety and the environment.
Di-methyl ether shows some potential as an alternative fuel; however,
there are presently disadvantages which need resolution in terms of
lubricity and corrosion together with the creation of sufficient production
and supply networks.
Fuel cells offer potential for ship propulsion with good experience gained in
auxiliary and low-power propulsion machinery. For marine propulsion, the
high-temperature solid oxide and molten carbonate fuel cells show most
promise, while for lower powers the low temperature proton exchange
membrane fuel cells are more suitable. While hydrogen is the easiest fuel
to use in fuel cells, this would require a worldwide infrastructure to be
developed for supply to ships.
Nuclear ship propulsion has the advantage during operation of producing
no CO2, NOX, SOX, volatile organic or particulate emissions. A significant
body of experience exists in the design and safe operation of shipboard
nuclear propulsion plant, particularly in the case of PWR designs. The
conventional methods of design, planning, building and operation of
merchant ships would, however, need a complete overhaul since the
process would be driven by a safety case and systems engineering
approach. Issues would also need to be addressed in terms of international
regulation, public perception and acceptability, financing the initial capital
cost, training and retention of crews, setting up and maintenance of a
global infrastructure support system, insurance and nuclear emergency
response plans for ports .
Battery technology is developing rapidly, offering some potential for
propulsion. However, full ship battery propulsion requires further
technical development and is likely to be confined to relatively small
ships. Nevertheless, battery-based propulsion would be beneficial due
to producing no CO2, NOX, SOX, volatile organic or particulate emissions in
operation. Batteries may offer a potential hybrid solution in conjunction
with other modes of propulsion for some small- to medium-sized ships
provided that their recharging does not increase the production of other
harmful emissions from land-based sources or elsewhere.
Superconducting electric motor technology has been successfully used
in demonstrator applications, with low electrical losses resulting in a
more efficient motor. Depending upon the type of prime mover deployed,
exhaust emissions will be lower, the machine can run for some time after a
coolant failure, and further advantages may accrue from their smaller size.
Future ship powering options 5
To develop future
ship propulsion
systems within
reasonable
timescales,
research and
funding are
needed in a number
of areas
Hydrogen, compressed air and liquid nitrogen are likely to be long-term
propulsion considerations. While the latter two options are energy storage
media, hydrogen is a fuel which generates no CO2 or SOX emissions to the
atmosphere and would use land-based sources of power for its creation.
It would need a supply infrastructure to be viable in a marine context, but
it is ideal for use in fuel cells. Compressed air and nitrogen would use landbased sources of power for creation and the tank storage technologies
are well understood – though tank corrosion is an issue in salt-laden
environments. The size, pressure rating and cryogenic capabilities, in the
case of liquid nitrogen, of the ship storage tanks will determine the amount
of energy storage and hence usefulness of the concept. As with hydrogen,
a supply and infrastructure and distribution network would be needed.
In summary, the following options are considered
appropriate:
i. For existing ships, reciprocating engines with exhaust gas attenuation
technologies are the principal option together with fuels that produce
fewer CO2 emissions. LNG is one such fuel and, together with some
other alternatives, would require an adequate bunkering infrastructure
to be developed, particularly for deep sea voyages. Some attention
could also be usefully paid to reducing the demand for shipboard
energy.
ii. For new buildings planned in the near-term, the scenario is broadly
similar but with the option to include hybrid propulsion systems
depending on ship size and intended use.
iii. In the case of ships to be built in the medium- to long-term, further
propulsion options include alternative fuel options, fuel cells, batteries
and nuclear. The former methods await technological development
but nuclear, while well understood technically, would require a major
change to ship owning and operation infrastructure
and practices.
Renewable power sources such as wind and solar are likely to be augments
to power requirements, assuming a return to full sail propulsion is not
contemplated. If, in the future, a hydrogen economy is adopted, then
hydrogen may become a realistic marine fuel option.
To develop future ship propulsion systems within reasonable timescales,
research and funding are needed in a number of areas: fuel cells capable
of sustainable powers for ship propulsion; modular nuclear reactors; hull
form and skin friction reduction measures; ship operational methodologies
and perhaps high capability batteries and hydrogen generation. There is
also a need for further soundly based techno-economic studies on target
emissions from ships.
6 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 7
Introduction
1. Introduction
International
shipping is
estimated to
contribute some
3% of global
emissions of CO2
The propulsion of merchant shipping
has, during the last century, undergone
a significant transformation. It is now
dominated by diesel propulsion machinery
with the cost of fuel accounting for a
large proportion of the running costs of
the ship. Against this background, recent
developments have led many in the industry
to question whether the present modes of
ship propulsion are sustainable due to three
main factors:
a. Rising fuel costs as a result of the
escalating price of oil.
b. Environmental regulations introduced to
mitigate the effects of climate change.
c. The potential introduction of carbon
taxes.
Within the wider international debate on
climate change there are increasing calls for
shipping to reduce emissions of greenhouse
gases, most notably carbon dioxide
although other exhaust gases components
3
2
1
8 Royal Academy of Engineering
2010
2007
2004
2001
1998
1995
1992
1989
1986
0
1962
[Stopford 2012]
4
1983
Figure 1.1 The trend in
cargo growth 1962 to 2011
5
1980
10%
6
1977
11%
18%
7
1974
3%
8
1971
Sea trade in 2011
At present some 95% of the world’s goods
are moved by sea. Furthermore, Figure
1.1 (Stopford, 2012) underlines generally
increasing trends in cargo growth with only
small perturbations that have coincided
with world financial or political difficulties.
This trend of increasing shipping activity is
forecast to increase further in a recent IMO
study. Additionally, it can be seen that, in
2011, the oil and the bulk transport trades
respectively accounted for 28% and 39%
9
1968
15%
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
are also included. International shipping is
estimated to contribute some 3% of global
emissions of CO2 and this, if no attenuating
action is implemented, will vary as the
shipping industry changes to reflect world
trade. Although the industry has reduced
its consumption of fossil fuels by, for
example, employing increasingly thermally
efficient diesel engines in recent decades,
the current total fuel oil consumption is in
excess of 350 million tonnes per annum.
10
Oil
Gas
Iron ore
Coal
Other bulk
Container
Other
1965
28%
Billion tonnes of cargo
15%
of the total sea trade in terms of the weight
of cargo transported, while container
shipping was around 15%.
The carriage of freight by sea is low-cost.
Consequently, because the transport costs
are low the international community is not
generally aware of shipping economics.
Within the shipping industry, however,
competition for trade between companies
is strong and there are four elements
which have a significant influence on
shipping economics. These are the freight;
the shipbuilding; the sale and purchase;
and the scrapping markets. Freight rates
are largely a function of the available
transport capacity any political intervention
and world trade levels where these are
all variables. There are also components
of the derivative, voyage charter and
time-charter markets and it is all of these
component aspects which generate cash
for the shipping industry. The shipbuilding
market produces new ships for the industry
at agreed prices and thereby takes cash
out of the industry in return for ships to
be delivered at some time in the future,
typically in two or three years. In contrast,
the sale and purchase market moves cash
between shipping companies while the
demolition market generates a small income
when ships are scrapped.
The cyclic nature of economic prosperity
in the shipping industry has been a
characteristic of the industry for many
years. While the design life of a ship is
normally about 25 years, when freight rates
are low many younger ships may become
due for scrapping since they are relatively
inefficient and generally unfit for profit
generation. As such, the remaining value of
these ships has to be written off company
balance sheets. Consequently, under those
conditions, while there is an appetite within
the industry for innovation, there are also
reservations about the risks associated
with innovation in alternative propulsion
methods.
In the wider context, a recent report by
the Royal Society recommended that
“The most developed and the emerging
economies must stabilise and then reduce
material consumption levels through:
dramatic improvements in resource use
efficiency, including: reducing waste;
investment in sustainable resources,
technologies and infrastructures; and
systematically decoupling economic
activity from environmental impact.”
(Royal Society, 2012)
To lay a foundation for the consideration
of alternative means of propulsion of
merchant ships, the Royal Academy of
Engineering convened a working group
in July 2010, (Appendices 1, 2 and 3), to
consider the issues involved and this report
summarises the findings. It principally
considers the technical and regulatory
issues relating to the options and aims to
place these into short-, medium- and longterm perspectives.
1.1 Drivers for change
1.1.1 Carbon emissions
The Kyoto Protocol under Article 2.2
stated that “the Parties included in Annex
I shall pursue limitation or reduction of
emissions of greenhouse gas emissions not
controlled by the Montreal Protocol from
aviation and marine bunker fuels, working
through the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) and the International
Maritime Organization (IMO), respectively.”.
Work has continued on this aspect under
the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and
Technological Advice and the Subsidiary
Body for Implementation although firm
agreements are yet to be reached.
Failure to reach agreement at the
international level has prompted individual
nations or groups of nations to consider
the issue. The European Union, under the
European Climate Change Programme II, is
carrying out a consultation on options to
include shipping in its overall commitments
to greenhouse gas reduction. It has
welcomed the introduction of the Energy
Future ship powering options 9
Introduction
Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) developed
within the IMO forum and sees monitoring
emissions as the first step in controlling
emissions. However, it is clearly intent on
pushing forward with actual reductions
(Appendix 4).
The United Kingdom legally enshrined
greenhouse gas emission reduction targets
under the 2008 Climate Change Act: 80%
reductions relative to 1990 levels by 2050
with interim budgets specified up to that
date. Currently, aviation and shipping are
not included in these targets. However,
the Committee for Climate Change, an
independent statutory body set up to
advise government on setting and meeting
the carbon budgets, have concluded that
there is no reason to treat shipping any
differently from other sectors. Specifically,
they recommend that:
• International shipping emissions should
be added at around 9 MtCO2e per year,
based on a projection of UK emissions
which reflects current international
policy; that is, the EEDI adopted by the
International Maritime Organisation.
• Non-Kyoto climate effects of aviation,
for example contrails and induced
cirrus, and shipping should be further
researched, closely monitored and
reduced where possible, but not
included in carbon budgets.
1.1.2 Price of oil
While air- and water-related emissions
already influence the design and operation
of ships, of more immediate concern to ship
operators is the current and future price of
oil. With fuel costs accounting for as much
as 50 to 60% of total operating costs, rises
in bunker fuel prices have implications for
ship operating economics and margins.
Within this scenario the level playing field
concept, cherished by ship operators, is an
essential aspect of shipping commerce.
Historically, the bunker prices of marine
fuels have fluctuated significantly and
Figure 1.2 shows the changes for 380
cSt marine fuel over the last 20 years.
Furthermore, these fluctuations are
reflected in the various markets around
the world and there are similar trends
observable between the different grades
of fuel. Over the same period, crude oil
prices (BP 2012) have shown similar general
tends in price fluctuation; however, when
viewed in a longer time frame major
global events, such as World War II, do not
appear to have had a significant effect.
Consequently, over the last two decades
bunker prices have been showing an
increasing mean trend together with large
fluctuations about the mean trend.
The 18th and
19th Centuries
were times of
innovation, not
just in hull form,
structure and
sail design but
also in matters of
ship performancE
Recognising that oil is ultimately a finite
resource, there have been repeated
$800
$700
$600
$500
Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2012)
$400
$300
$200
$100
10 Royal Academy of Engineering
Jan 90
Aug 90
Mar 91
Oct 91
May 92
Dec 92
Jul 93
Feb 94
Sep 94
Apr 95
Nov95
Jun 96
Jan 97
Aug 97
Mar 98
Oct 98
May 99
Dec 99
Jul 00
Feb 01
Sep 01
Apr 02
Nov 02
Jun 03
Jan 04
Aug 04
Mar 05
Oct 05
May 06
Dec 06
Jul 07
Feb 08
Sep 08
Apr 09
Nov 09
Jun 10
Jan 11
Aug 11
Mar 12
Oct 12
$
Figure 1.2 Historical bunker prices
for 380 cSt marine fuel [Platts]
Proven oil reserves relative to current
demand have remained relatively constant
for many years (BP 2012) due mainly to better
methods of identifying prospective fields
as well as the opening up of previously
uneconomic fields. This has been made
possible by advanced drilling techniques
which have now become economic because
prices have increased. Furthermore, the
price of oil appears to have a relationship
with the activities of global finance
markets as well as on the fundamentals of
supply and demand; something that world
governments, led by the US, are attempting
to control.
Increases in the use of natural gas are also
influential in that liquefied natural gas (LNG)
has become a global commodity supplying
industry and the domestic market. The
supply is supplemented by unconventional
types of petroleum, particularly shale
gas in the US and tar sands in Canada,
which are opening up new resources of
hydrocarbons and demonstrating that many
years will pass before the world runs out of
this energy source. It remains to be seen,
however, as to whether these sources can
be extracted at a sufficient rate and price
to satisfy global demand. Furthermore,
concerns have been expressed about the
extraction procedures on the surrounding
environment and, in the case of the
United Kingdom, a recent report (Royal
380CST
380CST
•Houston
380CST
•Singapore
380CST
•Rotterdam
•Fujairah 380CST
concerns over the years that supplies are
dwindling and that production may one day
fail to meet demand. This concept is known
as peak oil. With demand growing, especially
in developing nations, and the apparent rate
of discovery of new oil fields dropping, the
prospect of a global peak in oil production
has led some to speculate that the price of
oil will rise significantly in the future.
Figure 1.3 Copper sheathing on
the hull of the Cutty Sark
has reviewed the hydraulic fracturing
processes involved. It concluded that the
risks associated with the extraction of shale
gas can be managed effectively as long as
operational best practices are implemented
and robustly enforced through regulation.
At present and for the foreseeable future
predictions of the future price of fuel will
remain uncertain and financing shipboard
fuel supplies is the responsibility of ship
operators to exercise judgement and
the necessity for hedging arrangements.
Clearly, if at some time in the future the
price of oil was to decrease, then the
attractiveness of alternative means of
propulsion from a purely operational
viewpoint would wane. However, within the
wider context of a likely increasing demand
for seaborne transport and reductions in
land-based emissions, marine emissions
require some attention.
1.2 The Shipping
industry
1.2.1 Technical development
The evolution of ships and their trade
routes has a long history, almost as long
as that of mankind. This development
of merchant ships witnessed a gradual
progression from relatively small and simple
sail-powered ships in earlier centuries
through to the larger and more complex fast
clipper ships in the latter part of the 19th
Century: some of these, under favourable
conditions, being able to attain speeds
of the order of 20 knots. Then as coaling
stations became more plentiful around the
globe, steamships started to make their
appearance and increased in numbers.
The 18th and 19th centuries were times of
innovation, not just in hull form, structure
and sail design but also in matters of ship
performance. For example, the introduction
in 1761 of copper hull sheathing on
HMS Alarm (Lambert 2008), initially to
prevent attacks on the hull by ship-boring
molluscs, showed significant benefit in
fouling prevention and hence propulsion
efficiency. Figure 1.3 shows a subsequent
development of this in relation to one of the
later tea clippers, the Cutty Sark.
[Courtesy J.Hensher]
Future ship powering options 11
Introduction
Figure 1.8 Medium-sized cruise ship [Courtesy A. Greig]
Figure 1.4 ss Turbinia
[Courtesy J.S.Carlton]
In parallel with sail propulsion, the pace of
mechanical and hydrodynamic propulsion
development increased rapidly during the
18th and 19th centuries (Pomeroy 2010).
These advances began with the steam
engine which, at that time, comprised
elementary boilers supplying reciprocating
engines; for example, Jonathan Hull’s patent
involving a Newcomen Steam engine in
1736. Steam-based propulsion technology
progressed to embrace the technical
advances developed by James Watt which
led to the Savannah in 1819 being powered
by a steam engine driving paddle wheels.
Towards the end of the 19th century
the steam turbine was adopted, initially
demonstrated by Sir Charles Parsons in his
celebrated vessel Turbinia at the Spithead
fleet review of 1897; (Figure 1.4). This single
event was to totally change ship propulsion
since it heralded the end of steam
reciprocating marine machinery in favour
of the steam turbine.
Only nine years later, in 1906, the rms
Mauritania was launched and was propelled
by steam turbines developing 76,000 shp
together with screw propulsion. Figure 1.5
gives some impression of the development
which took place during that period in
terms of the sizes of the two ships and the
installed power of their machinery. Eight
years later, the Transylvania became the
first ship to use geared steam turbines to
improve propulsive efficiency.
Figure 1.5 rms Mauritania on the River Tyne
© Tyne Wear Archives Museum
12 Royal Academy of Engineering
In parallel with the arrival of the steam
turbine, Rudolf Diesel, in 1892, took out a
patent and ran his first reciprocating engine
one year later. This line of development
paved the way for a small oil tanker, the
Vulcanus, to become the first ship to be
propelled by a diesel engine. It was followed
by a much larger ocean-going cargo ship,
the Selandia in 1912. About this time, the
first gas-powered ship Holzapfel 1 also
entered service. However, such was the
growth of diesel propulsion that by 1939
some 54% of the fleet was powered in this
way. The performance of diesel engines has
progressively improved, demonstrated by
a comparison of the thermal efficiency for
these early engines in current operation,
when thermal efficiency has risen to values
approaching 55% for slow speed engines.
The burning of heavy fuel was introduced
in the 1930s. Research started (Lamb 1948)
during the Second World War for its use in
marine diesel engines and it has become the
standard fuel for the majority of seagoing
ships today. Recently, however, local and
international legislation has begun to be
formulated and the focus is moving to
the more expensive lighter marine fuels
and the use of dual-fuelled engines. With
these engines, different grades of fuel
are burnt depending upon the prevailing
requirements within the emission zones.
In recent years, increasing oil prices have
prompted interest in alternative propulsion
options and changes in fuels for merchant
ships. Typical of these have been the
burning of LNG in reciprocating engines,
wind-assisted propulsion, ducted propellers,
energy-saving appendages and interest in
nuclear power.
Figure 1.6 Offshore supply ship
© Andrew Mackinnon
Figure 1.7 A large LNG carrier
© Mercator Media 2013
Gas turbines made their appearance in naval
ships as a method of marine propulsion,
particularly for high-speed and sprint
modes of operation. For naval propulsion
the gas turbines were marinised versions
of aero-engines. Subsequently, however,
for commercial ships, as well as the aero
derivatives, the industrial gas turbine found
favour in certain sectors of the industry
due to its relative robustness in terms of
operation and fuel usage.
Today the steam turbine has very largely
given way to the diesel engine. This
transition happened relatively quickly
and coincided with the breakthrough of
turbocharging and heavy fuel burning in
slow speed diesel engines which gave
these engines both the power and the fuel
economy to become more efficient than
steam turbine propulsion. Consequently,
steam turbines are normally only found
today in nuclear powered ships and
submarines as well as some LNG ships;
although in this latter case they are also
giving way to reciprocating machinery. In
the merchant sector the general demise of
steam plant has, in turn, led to a shortage of
qualified steam plant operators.
Developments with cruise ship technology
have led to the use of diesel-electric
propulsion arrangements. This is due to
endeavouring to achieve low noise and
vibration signatures, similar to steam
turbine-driven ships, combined with the
enhanced operational efficiency that is
achievable with this mode of propulsion by
utilising payoffs between propulsion and
hotel loadings.
1.2.2 Operation
Merchant ships are commonly designed and
built to one-off designs or in small batches
to suit the trade in which they are engaged:
this implies that, unlike the automotive or
aircraft industries, prototype testing is not
generally feasible. Cargo ships embrace a
range of types from large crude oil tankers
making long international voyages to small
cargo vessels port-hopping around a coast.
The nature of their trade varies: the liner
follows fixed routes carrying cargoes, these
days often in containers, while other ships
wander the globe picking up cargoes where
they can. These so-called tramp ships may
carry bulk cargoes of grain, cement, iron ore
or coal and may be fitted with deck cranes
which render them independent of port
facilities. In contrast, some ships have a
specialist function which might be servicing
offshore oil or wind farm facilities, (Figure
1.6); short sea, roll-on/roll-off ferries;
natural gas (LNG) carriers, (Figure 1.7);
refrigerated carriers of food or cruise ships
acting as holiday destinations, (Figure 1.8).
Each ship type has evolved specialised hull
and machinery forms which are adapted to
their trading requirements. Consequently,
innovative technologies are rarely suitable
for general application to all ships and a
careful selection must be made based on
the ship’s characteristics, available crew
skills and the desired operational profile of
the ship.
The ownership of shipping assets is
frequently complex. It would not be
unusual for a ship to be built in China, using
investment finance raised in Singapore,
for an owner based in Athens who then
devolves operational responsibility to a
management company situated in Monaco.
Future ship powering options 13
Introduction
Such an arrangement might involve a
charterer in South America shipping goods
from the USA to Germany. The ship in
question could very possibly be registered
in the Bahamas and thus be subjected to
the laws of that country. In this example
the Bahamas is the vessel’s flag state while
the United States and Germany are, for the
period of the ship’s stay in harbours there,
referred to as port states.
Based on gross tonnage, at the end of 2011
Panama and Liberia were the two largest
flag states and in terms of ship numbers this
amounted to 12%, and 5% respectively of
the world’s cargo-carrying merchant fleet
over 100 GT. The United Kingdom, in 12th
place, on the same basis accounted for
1.2%. If analysed in terms of the nationality
of the owner for ships over 1,000 GT, Japan
and Greece dominate with the United
Kingdom in 6th place (IHS Fairplay, 2011).
The marine industry has generally been
cautious in its approach to technology in all
but a few sectors. This is for many reasons,
including the use of new technologies in
an extremely hostile environment. The
cyclic economic nature of world trading and
its consequent influence on the finances
of shipping companies, together with the
constantly changing international political
scenarios under which the industry has to
work are also contributing factors. Within
this environment, innovative technologies
should not be considered in a single-country
sense or even in a Euro-centric way. Many
factors influence the take-up of ideas and
technologies in the marine industry which
include their initial cost and the commercial
relationships between the shipyards,
shipowners and the innovators as well as
the political aspirations of nations. It is,
therefore, essential for the marine industry
to take a global perspective on these
matters.
At the end of 2011, the total world fleet,
having individual deadweight tonnage in
excess of 100GT, comprised 104,305 ships
(IHS Fairplay, 2011) of which the cargo carrying
fleet accounted for 55,138 ships and
represented a total deadweight of 1,483.1
Mdwt. During that year, 2,609 ships were
completed while 1,412 were either disposed
of or, in some cases, lost. This difference
represented a net gain in world tonnage of
121.5 Mdwt and the average age of the fleet
was 19 years.
The composition of the cargo-carrying fleet
based on deadweight is shown by Table
1.1. On this basis it is seen that tankers and
bulk carriers account for 78% of the world
fleet. Next in significance as a sector is the
container fleet which amounts to a further
13%. These three ship types account for
91% of the world cargo-carrying fleet.
Ship TypeProportion of the Sub-class
Sub-class proportion
cargo-carrying fleet (%)of cargo-carrying fleet (%)
Tanker
37
Crude oil carriers
24
Chemical tankers
6
LNG carriers
2
Products tankers
4
LPG tankers
1
Bulk carriers
41
Dry bulk
40
Self discharging dry bulk
<1
Dry bulk/oil
<1
Other dry bulk types
<1
Container13
General & refrigerated cargo
Table 1.1 Composition
of the world cargo fleet
(over 100 Dwt) based on
dwt [(IHS Fairplay (2011)]
6
Ro/Ro and Ro/Pax
2
Cruise and passenger
<1
Miscellaneous<1
14 Royal Academy of Engineering
the IMO’s
International
Safety
Management (ISM)
Code provides an
international
standard for the
safe management
and operation
of ships and
for pollution
prevention
1.3 International
regulations
The international maritime community
operates in territorial and international
waters across the globe and requires a
regulatory regime which can properly serve
this level of international complexity. The
International Maritime Organisation, based
in London, is a limb of the United Nations
and provides this forum together with a
secretariat for flag state governments. In
this forum, observed by other interested
parties, suites of regulations are agreed,
revised and published as Conventions and
when ratified, implemented by states in
national laws which then apply to ships
flying their flags. Frequently, IMO rules are
made retrospective to an incident and the
attainment of international agreement
may involve protracted implementation
timescales in order to satisfy the concerns
of nations.
The IMO Conventions most relevant to this
report are:
• Safety of Life at Sea Convention
(SOLAS) has a broad coverage from
the safety aspects of ship structural
construction, stability and fire protection
through to safety management
and navigation rules. SOLAS is the
cornerstone of international maritime
safety requirements, having been
initiated as a result of the Titanic disaster
and built upon over time so that today
it has become a comprehensive safety
document.
• Prevention of Marine Pollution
Convention (MARPOL) applies
principally to the protection of the
marine environment and embraces
contamination by oil, chemical spills,
sewage, marine species, garbage and
air pollution by engine exhaust gases.
The requirements are stringent and
national penalties for non-compliance
often severe. A recent focus has
been on addressing the international
community’s concerns about climate
change and commercial shipping’s
contribution to pollution levels.
• Standards of Training, Certification
and Watchkeeping (STCW) sets
standards for the training for seafarer
skills and qualifications. These
are reflected in the certificates of
competency acquired by merchant
navy officers as they progress up the
promotional ladder towards Master and
Chief Engineer.
In addition to these conventions, the IMO’s
International Safety Management (ISM)
Code provides an international standard
for the safe management and operation of
ships and for pollution prevention.
The responsibility for governmental
application of IMO’s international rules
in the United Kingdom rests with the
Maritime and Coastguard Agency, which
is a limb of the Department for Transport.
This agency employs technical expertise
commensurate with this role and represents
the UK in several international maritime
fora. Its surveyors provide enforcement
of regulations on UK-flagged ships and
constitute a port state control inspectorate
for regulation compliance by visiting ships.
The contraction of the European
commercial shipbuilding and marine
engineering industries has led to a
refocusing of technical activity in these
fields. Besides that which exists in the
navies and some shipyards specialising in
complex ships, the principal repository of
naval architectural and marine engineering
knowledge largely rests with the principal
classification societies together with
some major consultancy organisations,
universities and the professional
learned societies. The classification
societies have progressively developed
standards for ships’ hull and machinery
design, construction and repair based
on programmes of continuing research
combined with accumulated experience
of shipbuilding and service operation. The
once pre-eminent technical position of
Future ship powering options 15
Introduction
1.3.1 Emissions control under
MARPOL Annex VI
During the 1990s, attention to air pollution
and global warming led to regulations
restricting the emission of the oxides
of nitrogen (NOX) and sulphur (SOX):
pollutants produced during combustion
in diesel engine cylinders. Subsequent
amendments have included restrictions on
the emissions of ozone, particulate matter
and greenhouse gases.
The MARPOL Annex VI NOX emission
standards are arranged in three tiers: Tiers
I, II and III. The Tier I standards were defined
in the 1997 version of the Annex, while
the Tier II/III standards were introduced by
amendments adopted in 2008, as follows:
• 1997 Protocol (Tier I) – The 1997
Protocol to MARPOL, which includes
Annex VI, became effective on 18 May
2004 when Annex VI was ratified by
• 2008 Amendments (Tier II/III) – Annex
VI amendments adopted in October
2008 introduced new fuel quality
requirements which commenced in
July 2010; Tier II and III NOX emission
standards for new engines; and Tier I
NOX requirements for existing pre-2000
engines. The revised Annex VI entered
into force on 1 July 2010. By October
2008, Annex VI was ratified by 53
countries, including the Unites States,
which represented 81.9% of tonnage.
The NOX limits apply globally, whereas at
this time the SOX emissions requirements of
Annex VI vary depending on where the ship
is sailing. More stringent emission levels for
SOX apply in certain Emission Control Areas.
Currently there are four ECAs located in the
Baltic Sea, North Sea, around North America
and the US Caribbean as seen in Figure 1.9.
Mode of transportRelative CO2 index
Aeroplane398
Small goods vehicle
226
Large articulated truck
49
Railway haulage
6
Large container ship
3
Large tanker
1
Table 1.4 Relative CO2 emissions of
different modes of transport [MOL, 2004]
5%
100
26%
80
60
40
43%
20
1.4 Global context
of shipping
Ships compare well in CO2 emission terms
with other forms of transport. Using a large
tanker as reference for transporting one
tonne of cargo over one mile, Table 1.4
shows the relative relationship between
different modes of transport. These studies
were completed some 10 years ago and
in the intervening time technology will
have reduced CO2 emissions in each of the
sectors, consequently, today some variation
in the absolute detail of the table can be
expected. This will be particularly true
of the automobile industry where
emissions control of engines has been
particularly good.
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
0
1998
[DfT]
20%
120
1996
Figure 1.10 Total UK
transport greenhouse gas
emissions: 1990 –2009
6%
140
1994
states with 54.6% of world merchant
shipping tonnage. Accordingly, Annex
VI entered into force on 19 May 2005. It
applied retrospectively to new engines
of greater than 130 kW installed on
vessels constructed on or after 1st
January 2000, or which underwent a
major conversion after that date. In
anticipation of the Annex VI ratification,
most marine engine manufacturers have
been building engines compliant with the
above standards since 2000.
160
1992
British and European shipbuilding and repair
acted as the foundation for much of this
knowledge. However, these activities have
either transferred or are in the process of
transferring to other geographical locations;
chiefly to the Far East. Nevertheless,
the major classification societies have
offices in these newer centres of activity
which enables these technical knowledge
repositories to be continually enhanced.
180
1990
Ships compare
well in CO2
emission terms
with other forms
of transport
200
Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent
•International shipping
•International aviation
•Domestic exc. road transport
•Road transport exc. car and taxis
•Cars and taxis
An alternative scenario is based on a
statistical analysis of the United Kingdom
transport greenhouse gas emissions over
the twenty year period 1990 to 2009,
(Figure 1.10). It is seen that the international
shipping component was around 6% in
2009: the absolute quantity in terms of
CO2 equivalent having remained broadly
constant throughout the period under
review.
Carbon efficiency has a strong relationship
to ship size. Figure 1.11 outlines the
approximate trend between the mass of
CO2 emitted per tonne-mile and the size of
ships, in this case plotted for container ships
and crude oil tankers. Clearly, the trend
observable is one of decreasing specific
emission with increasing size of the ship.
80
70
60
50
20
Container (‘000 TEU)
200+
120–200
80–120
10–60
0–10
8+
5–8
3–5
2–3
0
1–2
10
60–80
[Committee on Climate Change
(2011)]
30
0–1
Figure 1.11 Carbon
efficiency of container ships
and crude oil tankers
gCO2 per tonne-mile
40
Crude tanker ‘000 DWT)
Figure 1.9 Current
emission control areas
[Lloyd’s Register]
16 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 17
Design Options
2. Design options
2.1 Ship energy
considerations
To achieve full potential efficiency and
environmental benefits a ship must be
considered as an engineering system within
its intended operational profile. This implies
that the design, operation and maintenance
aspects of the ship have to be considered
as an integrated system. More specifically,
the integrated design has to embrace,
within a single system, the traditional
disciplines of naval architecture, marine and
electrical engineering together with control
technology.
Typical energy flows in a ship are illustrated
in Figure 2.1 for a tanker or bulk carrier
before any energy saving measures is
contemplated.
This ship type has been chosen for Figure
2.1 because they form 64% of the world
fleet as seen in Table 1.1. Such a ship
could be expected to comprise a slow
speed diesel engine directly coupled to
a fixed pitch propeller. From the figure it
is seen that from the total energy input
to the machinery system from the fuel,
only around 27% is actually available
at the ship’s propeller. However, there
are a number of options to enhance the
overall efficiency and energy available for
propulsion purposes; for example, exhaust
heat recovery within certain constraints
such as the dew point of aggressive
chemical species in the exhaust gases, and
low grade heat from cooling water systems.
Losses in shaft line
18 Royal Academy of Engineering
When poor weather is encountered,
further energy losses occur. These arise
from the added resistance of the hull due
to its interaction with surface waves and
underlying swell. Additionally, the wind
acting on the ship’s exposed surfaces acts
as a further source of resistance.
To ascertain the viability of
alternative propulsion solutions
the whole market opportunity
must be analysed in a systemic and
structured manner
Propeller losses
2.2 The ship system
If a change to a ship’s power generation
method is contemplated, either as a
departure from conventional practice or in
terms of a retrofit, significant implications
usually arise for the ship system. From
a ship owner’s perspective, it may be
conceptually convenient to consider a
conventional diesel-propelled system
being replaced by an alternative propulsion
method and then expect the resulting
system to operate and behave in the same
way as before. However, looking more
deeply into the desired solution may show
that to swap one prime mover option for
another requires the interfaces to the other
ship sub-systems to be in the same place or
aligned in the same way. This, if achievable,
will minimise cost and ease the transition
process.
To ascertain the viability of alternative
propulsion solutions, the whole market
opportunity must be analysed in a systemic
and structured manner. In contrast to
many current design solutions which
have historically evolved, the discipline of
systems engineering, (Appendix 5), enables
a wider perspective to be taken when
radical departures from traditional solutions
are contemplated. The design life cycle
can be divided into four stages: assembling
stakeholder requirements; exploring the
system meta-solution to find the best model
for success; progressing the design based
on the requirements and, finally, defining
and analysing the system to ensure it meets
the original requirements. Fundamental
to this design process is the desired ship’s
operational profile and the perceived
tolerance on this profile necessary to meet
market fluctuations. Furthermore, the
fluctuations in daily ship and fuel costs that
might be anticipated together with the
operational profile should be used to define
a design space within which the ship system
can be progressed.
100%
Input
Thrust Power =
Thrust x Ship Speed
Propeller
restrictions. The propeller open water
efficiency for large full form ships, such
as tankers and bulk carriers, is generally
relatively low, albeit that an optimum
propeller has been designed for the
powering conditions prevailing at the
aft end of the ship. In the case of faster
and more slender-lined ships, such as
container and Ro/Ro ships, the propeller
open water efficiency generally rises
appreciably. However, the propeller open
water efficiency is combined with the hull
efficiency, relative rotative efficiency and
transmission efficiencies to give the overall
propulsion efficiency for the ship.
For merchant ships the propeller is usually
designed to give high efficiency during
operation, consistent with any vibration
considerations and operational profile
Losses in exhaust, cooling,
friction, processes, etc
Figure 2.1 Typical
power utilisation in a
tanker or bulk carrier
the propeller
open water
efficiency
is combined
with the hull
efficiency,
relative rotative
efficiency and
transmission
efficiencies to
give the overall
propulsion
efficiency for
the ship
Shaftlline
Engine
Future ship powering options 19
Design Options
2.3 Energy Efficiency
Design Index
The Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) is
a developing ship design parameter which
seeks to govern the CO2 production of ships
in relation to their usefulness to society.
It is one of three initiatives developed by
the IMO MEPC Subcommittee: the others
being the Energy Efficiency Operational
Index (EEOI) and the Ship Energy Efficiency
Management Plan (SEEMP). The EEDI,
regarded by some as an imperfect
parameter, in its simplest terms is the ratio
between the cost to society expressed as
the carbon dioxide production potential of
the ship and its benefit to society in terms
of its cargo capacity and speed for some
nominal design point. The CO2 production
potential comprises four components:
• The carbon dioxide directly attributable
to the ship’s propulsion machinery.
• The carbon dioxide arising from the
auxiliary and hotel power loads of
the ship.
• The reduction of carbon dioxide due
to energy efficiency technologies.
For example, heat recovery systems.
• The reduction of carbon dioxide due
to the incorporation of innovative
energy efficiency technologies in the
design. Typically, these might include
the introduction of sails or novel
hydrodynamic devices.
The EEDI parameter governs the ship
design philosophy and the particular value
calculated for a proposed ship design has to
be verified by an independent organisation
against defined criteria, expressed as
reference lines, to obtain certification.
To define the reference lines parametric
studies were undertaken embracing
variations in size for the ship types being
considered. At present the Index is applied
to the design of ships above 400grt and
will include tankers, gas carriers, container
ships, cargo ships and refrigerated
cargo ships. These ships will require an
International Energy Efficiency Certificate
(IEEC) to show compliance with the EEDI
20 Royal Academy of Engineering
procedure. However, certain ship types,
whatever their size, are for the time being
excluded from Index compliance and these
are diesel-electric and turbine-driven ships;
fishing vessels; offshore and service vessels.
Full implementation of the EEDI-based
system is to be achieved within a phased
process, not dissimilar to the MEPC Annex
VI requirements for NOX emissions. To
facilitate this, a reducing factor will be
applied to the ship type reference lines and
the reducing factor will vary with respect to
the phase implementation time intervals;
currently set at 2013–2017; 2018–2022 and
2023–27. In each of these periods the factor
will be set to a prescribed value such that
the Required Index value can be reduced
in steps.
The Actual EEDI, calculated for the proposed
ship design, must then be shown to be
less than or equal to the Required EEDI.
The computation of the Actual EEDI for a
subject ship design is achieved through the
use of the relationship defined in Appendix
8. This includes the four CO2-producing or
regulating components in the numerator
while the denominator is essentially the
product of ship speed and cargo capacity.
Examination of the Actual EEDI defining
equation suggests a number of ways that
compliance with the requirements might be
achieved as well as options for reducing the
value of the Index for a given ship. Typically
these are:
• The installation of engines, subject to
certain minima, in a ship with less power
and, thereby, the adoption of a lower
ship speed.
• To incorporate a range of energyefficient technologies in order to
minimise the fuel consumption for a
given power absorption.
• The use of renewable or innovative
energy reduction technologies so as to
minimise the CO2 production.
• To employ low-carbon fuels and in so
doing produce less CO2 than would
otherwise have been the case with
conventional fuels.
Picture of carrier taken by crew in storm conditions
An account of a capesize bulk carrier in a storm (Cooper 2012).
“… in a Storm Force 10/11 with 8 to 10 metre swells,… We managed to
maintain about 85% of available main engine power for the 24 hours that we
were hove-to. It was just about enough to keep us from falling too far off the
wind and seas. We lost about 80 miles that day, with us making two or three
knots astern.
“This saga could have a different ending if we had been trapped on a lee shore
or in confined waters…
There is a
considerable
range of
energy-saving
technologies
available for
ships. These
broadly relate
to primary
propulsion and
hydrodynamic
options
“…there is no way I could have turned that vessel through the wind with its
high accommodation and large square funnel. The main engine governor was
giving us the maximum power available for the conditions and although the
Chief Engineer could have overridden the governor and increased power, the
danger would have been burying the bows repeatedly into the very heavy
swell with a high risk of damage to air pipes, stores and rope hatches, and even
to the forward hatch covers, not to mention overloading the main engine with
a resultant loss of power.”
• To increase the ship’s deadweight by
changes to or enhancements in the
design.
If the option to install engines into the ship
of a lower power rating were adopted, this
would be a relatively simple and effective
way to reduce the value of EEDI. Such an
option, however, begs the question as to
whether the ship would then have sufficient
power to navigate safely in poor weather
conditions. The description in the above
text box illustrates a situation where a
capesize bulk carrier was caught in a storm
(Cooper 2012). Another potentially dangerous
situation is to be found in manoeuvring
satisfactorily in restricted channels or
harbours under a range of adverse tidal and
weather conditions. However, in the latter
context, tugs might normally be employed.
There is a considerable range of energysaving technologies available for ships.
These broadly relate to primary propulsion
and hydrodynamic options. However, there
is also an emerging class of devices which
are dependent on aerodynamic principles.
The deployment of these technologies in
specific instances is dependent on the ship’s
type, size and operational profile, with in
some cases sociopolitical considerations,
as well as on the ship’s hull form. This is
further complicated for some existing ship
designs in relation to any other energysaving devices that have been previously
fitted: some being incompatible with each
other. In all cases, however, a total systems
engineering approach should be undertaken
to avoid disappointing results.
Future ship powering options 21
Primary propulsion options
Uaxial
3. Primary propulsion
options
-1
Figure 3.2 Flow studies
in diesel injector nozzles
[edited from Andriotis et al.
2008]
fuel oil consumption in medium speed
four stroke engines. Typical of these
developments have been flow studies in
injector nozzles with particular reference to
the effects of cavitation on fuel atomisation
and spray structure and repeatability;
(Figure 3.2).
Since the 1960s
and 70s the
development of
slow and medium
speed diesel
engines has been
driven by the
need for better
fuel economy
In the context of this report, primary
propulsion options relate to the sources
and modes of developing power to propel
the ship. In contrast, further propulsion
considerations, Section 4 considers the
means of converting that power into useful
and efficient ship propulsion.
a. Low speed marine diesel engine, the Wärtsilä
RT-flex82T version B main engine © Wärtsilä
CONVENTIONAL
PROPULSION
OPTIONS AND
FUELS
3.1 Diesel engines
Today diesel propelled machinery is the
principal means of marine propulsion.
Engines are broadly classified into slow
speed two stroke; medium speed four
stroke; and high speed four stroke engines;
(Figures 3.1 (a & b)). While some ships, due
to their design and operational profile, use
either slow or medium speed diesel engines
as the principal mode of propulsion, most
ships are fitted with additional medium
or high speed diesel engines to drive
generator sets for auxiliary power purposes.
Additionally, all merchant ships have an
emergency means of generating electrical
power as required by SOLAS.
Since the 1960s and 70s the development
of slow and medium speed diesel engines
has been driven by the need for better fuel
economy. The result has been increased
stroke/bore ratio, peak pressures and mean
piston speeds in slow speed, two stroke
engines to achieve significant reductions in
specific fuel oil consumption.
b. Medium speed diesel engine © Wärtsilä
Figure 3.1 Typical marine
propulsion diesel engines
22 Royal Academy of Engineering
Similar improvements in turbocharging
efficiency, fuel injection technology,
brake mean effective pressure and firing
pressures have brought down specific
However, since the early 1990s, the drivers
for diesel engine development changed.
The concept of reduction of NOX and SOX,
involving primary and secondary processes,
without detriment to fuel consumption
became a major priority to meet the limits
imposed in current and future emission
control areas. The result has been a number
of developments in marine diesel engine
technology which include:
Primary methods
• Low NOX combustion, adjustable
camshafts
• Variable inlet valve control
• Improved combustion chamber design
• Higher boost pressures
• Greater mechanical strength in engine
architecture
• Development of two stage turbocharging
• Exhaust gas recirculation
• Waste gate technology
• Sequential turbocharging
• Variable turbine geometry
(m s-1)
1
Liquid (%)
0.2
0.9
• Humidification of inlet air or water
injection
• Emulsification of fuels
Secondary methods
• Selective catalytic reduction systems
• Low sulphur fuels for SOX limitation
• Exhaust gas scrubber systems both using
direct seawater scrubbing or closed
circuit freshwater scrubbing
The primary methods of limiting NOX
production in the combustion process are
directed towards optimising the engine
parameters which include reducing the peak
temperature and duration of the process, by
much higher-pressure fuel injection over a
shorter period, accurate timing and control
of the injection, the use of Miller inlet valve
timing and higher-pressure turbocharging.
This has led to current developments in
two-stage turbocharging for even higher
operating pressures but with significantly
lower fuel consumptions, thereby making
way for further efficiency improvements in
engines.
Debate among engine builders exists
concerning the most effective method
for the various engines. Exhaust gas
recirculation is a method which can be
deployed for NOX reduction purposes in
Miller Cycle
In the Miller Cycle the charge air is compressed to a higher pressure than is needed
for the engine cycle. A reduced filling of the cylinders is then controlled by suitable
timing of the inlet valve which then permits some expansion of the charge air to
take place within the cylinders. This expansion process allows cooling of the charge
at the beginning of the cycle whereupon its density increases. This results in the
potential for the power of a given engine to be increased. The practical application
of the Miller Cycle, however, requires a turbocharger capable of achieving high
compressor pressure ratios in association with high efficiency at these conditions.
While initially developed with the aim of increasing engine power density, it has
been found that the Miller Cycle can be used, by reducing cycle temperatures at
constant pressure, to reduce NOX formation during combustion.
Future ship powering options 23
Primary propulsion options
slow and medium speed diesel engines. In
the case of two stroke, slow speed engines,
development programmes have been
undertaken with exhaust gas recirculation
systems over the last 20 years or so.
Among these have been in-service trials
conducted onboard the Alexander Maersk
which have made useful contributions to
the understanding of these systems. With
the EGR method of NOX reduction some of
the oxygen in the scavenged air is replaced
with CO2 since carbon dioxide has a higher
heat capacity which reduces the peak
temperatures within the cylinders. Inservice trials have shown that components
in the system such as the piston rings,
EGR blowers, the water mist catcher and
control systems have performed well. Water
injection into the cylinders at the time
of combustion and humidification of the
inlet air is also helpful in reducing the NOX
content of the exhaust gases from slow
speed engines. Several methods have been
designed and tested for this purpose by the
various manufacturers of slow and medium
speed engines.
An additional secondary method of NOX
reduction to meet the Tier 3 targets is
selective catalytic reduction. SCR systems
can be useful when working in emission
control areas; however, cost becomes
a critical factor when deciding on the
most appropriate system. In the case of
medium speed, four stroke engines it is
reported that SCR systems offer an 80%
improvement in NOX reduction (Troberg,
2012). One approach relies on the injection of
ammonia into the exhaust gas flow, usually
in the form of a urea solution. This reacts
with the NOX exhaust component at the
surface of the selective catalytic reduction
elements to form N and H2O. This method,
however, requires space to be allocated in
the ship for the urea storage, the dosing and
Engine parameter
Table 3.1 Comparison
between an ultra-long
stroke and a traditional
engine (Jakobsen 2012)
24 Royal Academy of Engineering
control systems, and the selective catalytic
reduction elements which may replace the
normal silencer.
The Green Ship of the Future Project
undertook a retrofit study for a 38,500
dwt tanker powered by a slow speed diesel
engine which was planned to spend 13.5%
of its time in an environmental control
area (Green Ship of the Future Project, 2012).
Three options were considered: the use
of low sulphur fuel; placing an exhaust
gas scrubber in the system or using LNG
as a fuel. The low sulphur fuel option
introduced some lubrication issues. The
exhaust scrubber alternative, based on
using heavy fuel oil after 2015, required a
new funnel layout due to the introduction
of the scrubber together with its associated
machinery and new tanks. In the latter case,
the LNG fuel usage required new piping and
a fuel supply system together with new
LNG tanks; in this case two 350 m3 tanks
mounted on deck. The associated costs,
based on industry quotations, for these
last two options were estimated at 5.84M
US$, 50% of which was for the scrubber
and auxiliary machinery, and 7.56M US$
respectively. In the LNG case, the tanks and
machinery conversion were costed at 4.38M
US$ with 40 days’ off-hire time. In contrast
the scrubber option required an estimated
20 days’ off-hire time.
A new class of ultra-long stroke engines
has been introduced into the marine
propulsion market. These engines have
a lower design speed and if used with an
optimum large diameter propeller at these
low rotational speeds, the overall ship
propulsion efficiency can be enhanced. This
hydrodynamic benefit can then be coupled
with the enhanced fuel oil consumption
characteristics of the engine. Table 3.1
shows the quoted fuel consumption
K98 ME engine
S90 ME engine
Stroke (mm)
2660
Speed (rpm)
97
3260
84
Specific fuel oil consumption (g/kWh)
174
167
A new class of
ultra-long stroke
engines has
been introduced
into the marine
propulsion
market. These
engines have a
lower design
speed and if used
with an optimum
large diameter
propeller at these
low rotational
speeds, the
overall ship
propulsion
efficiency can be
enhanced
differences between an ultra-long stroke
engine and a more traditional engine.
To reduce fuel consumption there has been
a tendency to run large marine engines
at part load. While such restrictions have
largely been confined to continuous powers
above 60% of maximum continuous rating
(MCR), more recently in container ship
operation these limitations have been as
low as 10% MCR. To achieve these very
low loads the lubricating oil supply has to
be reduced together with the introduction
of engine tuning methods for part and low
load. Of significance in this context are
exhaust gas bypass; variable turbine area;
engine control timing and high-pressure
tuning.
In the marine industry, while fuels are
classified into different grades there are
no standard specifications. Consequently,
fuel composition and quality can be variable
when bunkering in ports around the world.
While slow speed engines are reasonably
tolerant of fuel variations, medium speed
engines tend to be less so (Wilson, 2012).
However, that the fuels lack specification
does not imply that the diesel engine
combustion processes cannot be managed.
Indeed, guidelines for fuel ignition and
quality to assist in the fuel management
processes have been developed (CIMAC
2011). Since the marine supply chain has
been contaminated to a small extent
with biofuels, (Section 3.2), in the case of
distillate fuels, additional management
practices need to be put in place to control
this aspect.
To control the sulphur in the fuel the ship
operator has three principal choices. The
first is to bunker low sulphur fuels either
wholly or partially, so that in the latter
case the ship can switch to a low sulphur
fuel when in an ECA. This, however, has
implications for fuel storage and handling
systems on the ship; changeover processes;
the technology of engine and boiler fuel
injection systems and the choices of
lubricating oils, etc. An alternative solution
is to install secondary abatement systems
for the removal of sulphur from the exhaust
after combustion. This requires the use of
high volumes of seawater or, alternatively,
a smaller volume of freshwater with a
dosing of caustic soda. There is also a
further process which is based on the
ionisation of seawater. The third choice is
the use of LNG as a fuel, which is principally
methane (CH4); see Section 3.3. However,
methane is a greenhouse gas and if
significant methane slip occurs within the
engine combustion or bunkering processes
this aspect can be enhanced.
Methane Slip
Methane slip is a cause for concern
because of the properties of methane,
when considered as a greenhouse gas,
are 21 times more potent than CO2
(IPCC 1995). It may derive from two
sources, the first being operational
emissions while the second derives
from engine emissions. In the first
case, this may be from the venting
of methane to atmosphere during
refuelling while in the latter case
of engine emissions this relates to
unburnt or incomplete combustion of
methane passing through the engine
system. In the context of engine
emissions, methane slip may be due
to the engine concept, engine design,
its operational profile or due
to maintenance.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Diesel engine technology is a wellunderstood and reliable form of
marine propulsion and auxiliary power
generation technology.
ii. The training of engineers to operate
diesel machinery is well known and
facilities exist for the appropriate levels
of education.
iii. Engine manufacturers have wellestablished repair and spare part
Future ship powering options 25
Primary propulsion options
networks around the world.
iv. Diesel fuel in all grades has a worldwide
distribution network and is easily
obtainable.
v. Many primary and secondary methods
for reducing emissions which are
perceived to be harmful are now
available. Furthermore, there is a
continuing programme of research and
development being undertaken by the
engine builders.
vi. Diesel engines are generally able to cope
with part load, transient and dynamic
behaviour in a seaway.
Disadvantages
i. Diesel engines produce CO2 emissions
as well as NOX, SOX, volatile organic
compounds and particulate matter.
Therefore, they have to be made
compliant with the MARPOL Annex VI
requirements and included during an
EEDI evaluation of the ship.
ii. The SOX emissions are a function of the
sulphur content of the fuel used in the
engine and to comply with regulations
an abatement technology has to be
employed.
iii. There is now some contamination of the
marine fuel supply by first-generation
biofuels which needs to be carefully
managed on board ships.
3.2 Biofuels
Living systems comprise a collection of
cells, genes and proteins which permit them
to grow and replicate. Understanding these
complex systems has occupied biologists
and chemists for much of the last century
and has resulted in first generation biofuels
with work continuing on subsequent
generations. The first-generation of
biofuels in widespread use are biodiesel
and bioethanol. Biodiesel is produced
from animal fats and vegetable oils such
as coconut, palm, rape seed, soybean and
tallow. These fuels are generally known
as Fatty Acid Methyl Esters (FAME) and
are produced by reacting the vegetable oil
or animal fat constituents with an alcohol
such as methanol. In contrast, bioethanol is
produced by fermenting renewable sources
of sugar or starch, typically cassava, corn,
sorghum, sugar beet, sugar cane, and
wheat.
There are a number of chemical
compositions of FAME raw materials.
The blend levels used result in fuels having
some variability in their cold temperature
performance, degradability and stability.
In turn, this has implications for handling,
storage, treatment, engine operations and
emissions.
FAME is able to hold high levels of water
in suspension and water may also induce
hydrolytic reactions which break down
the FAME to form fatty acids. These are
corrosive and can attack metal surfaces.
Alternatively, if the water separates out
of the FAME fuel this may give rise to
microbiological growth which can then lead
to the filter clogging. Corrosion problems
have also been experienced when used with
marine diesel engines.
A recent trial centred on the container
ship Maersk Kalmar (Lloyd’s Register 2011)
endeavoured to evaluate the impact
of Fatty Acid Methyl Esters and marine
distillate fuel containing FAME. The focus
of this trial was undertaken in the contexts
26 Royal Academy of Engineering
Using biofuels
derived from
natural
sources such as
vegetable oils
would require
a land area
equivalent to
that of about
twice the size the
United Kingdom
of storage, fuel handling, health, safety
and the environment. Additionally, the
influence on exhaust emissions, lubricating
oil performance, material compatibility and
long-term storage were also considered.
In part, these trials were stimulated by the
current practice within the automotive
industry of blending FAME into diesel
fuels intended for the automotive sector
which, therefore, enhances the probability
of cross-contamination with the marine
distillates. This probability is further
influenced by the EU marine fuel sulphur
requirements at berth of 0.1% and inland
waterways of 0.001%. The Maersk Kalmar
trials showed that while the automotive
biodiesel formulation was not optimal
for ship propulsion, the fuel was usable
during the trials. Furthermore, concerns
over microbial growth were shown not
to be an issue within the confines of the
trial; however, further investigation of this
aspect was considered necessary in the
future. Similarly, as engine running and
lubricant interaction times were relatively
short within these trials, to arrive at
definitive conclusions further sea trials and
test bed running were recommended.
The processes involved in biofuel
production from sugar or vegetable oils
are not particularly efficient and waste
a significant quantity of the biomass or
organic matter. The underlying reason
for this is that stalks and leaves, although
rich sources of sugars, are discarded
because they are difficult to break down
with present technology. Consequently,
an efficiency enhancement for these
processes must await the development of
the necessary enzymes.
In contrast to FAME the bioethanols are
single chemical compounds which are
colourless, hygroscopic, miscible with water
and are volatile. However, since bioethanol
is hygroscopic and highly soluble in water,
small quantities of water can be dissolved
in fuel blends containing bioethanol and
separation of the ethanol can result when
critical levels of water take-up are reached.
This facilitates alcohol-rich water/ethanol
aqueous and alcohol-weak gasoline phases
to form which then create the potential
for combustion problems. Moreover, the
former phase will collect at the bottom of
the storage tanks in the ship and is likely
to be very corrosive. Furthermore, while
bioethanol behaves as a solvent which
effectively cleans dirty storage tanks and
fuel lines it becomes contaminated during
this process.
To power the current worldwide fleet of
merchant ships, it is estimated that it would
require around 7.3 x 1018 J/year (MacKay,
2011). Using biofuels derived from natural
sources such as vegetable oils would
require a land area equivalent to that of
about twice the size the United Kingdom
(MacKay 2011). Oilseed rape, when used to
produce biodiesel, has a power per unit
area potential of about 0.13W/m2 (MacKay,
2009). Notwithstanding the size of the land
required for this purpose, there is also the
ethical question of whether it might be
better to deploy such agricultural areas for
world food production.
The science of synthetic biology, in the
context of fuels, has focused on the
production of biodiesel and bioethanol. In
the longer term more advanced biodiesel
fuels are likely to be developed together
with the associated synthetic biology-based
processes for efficient fuel production
in significant quantities (Royal Academy of
Engineering 2009). Alternative synthetic fuels
based on the branch-chain higher alcohols
and new types of E-coli as well as other
types of microorganisms, such as yeast,
may make their appearance. In the case of
algae-derived fuels, these are generally no
more efficient at photosynthesis than landbased plants; however, this efficiency can
be enhanced by water heavily enriched with
CO2. Even with this efficiency improvement,
algae-derived fuels are unlikely to satisfy
the demands of the worldwide marine
industry.
A further alternative fuel for compressionignition engines is di-methyl ether (DME).
This can be produced from the conversion
Future ship powering options 27
Primary propulsion options
to develop the
same level of
energy as
conventional
diesel fuels,
di-methyl ether
requires a higher
injected volume
of fuel due to its
lower density
and combustion
enthalpy
of a number of sources including natural
gas, coal, oil residues and biomass. DME is
relatively easy to handle; indeed it is not
dissimilar to LPG, because it is condensed
when pressurised above 0.5MPa and
it is thought to be both non-toxic and
environmentally benign. DME has a high
cetane number which may lead to a better
mixing with air in the engine cylinder
(Arcoumanis et al 2008) while its high oxygen
content can achieve smokeless combustion
through the low formation and oxidisation
rates of particulates. Notwithstanding
these potential benefits, to develop the
same level of energy as conventional diesel
fuels, di-methyl ether requires a higher
injected volume of fuel due to its lower
density and combustion enthalpy. Moreover,
DME-fuelled systems require lubricityenhancing additives and anti-corrosive
sealing materials to maintain leakage-free
operation. Additionally, if DME were used
as a fuel some attention would have to be
paid to the optimisation of the fuel injection
equipment to allow for the low density, low
lubricity and corrosiveness of the fuel.
Research has suggested that di-methyl
ether when used in compression-ignition
engines, despite its disadvantages, is able
to provide high thermal efficiency with low
combustion noise and NOX levels together
with soot-free combustion. Consequently,
this alternative fuel merits further study.
However, to deploy it in the marine industry
on a worldwide basis would require a fuel
supply chain network to be developed which
could sustain the needs of the industry.
This latter issue would be lessened if it
were used for short sea and inter-island
type services.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Biofuels are potential alternatives to
conventional fuels.
ii. Synthetic fuels based on branch-chain
higher alcohols and new types of
algae and other microorganisms are a
medium- to long-term possibility, given
that production volumes can satisfy
28 Royal Academy of Engineering
the demand from the marine and other
markets.
iii. Di-methyl ether shows some potential
benefits as an alternative fuel.
iv. Synthetic fuels can be derived from
syngas, created by partial combustion
of a wide range of biomass feedstocks.
Disadvantages
i. With the first generation of biofuels,
biodiesel and bioethanol, problems
have been experienced when used in
the marine environment. However, this
may not be the case with the secondgeneration biofuels.
ii. At the present time, significant land
areas need to be devoted to firstgeneration fuel production to satisfy
the marine market.
iii. The effective greenhouse gas emissions
of all types of biofuels, including fuels
derived from biomass, is currently an
area of active research. It is possible that
the available global resource of biomass
and biofuels may be inadequate to
supply shipping.
iv. The production processes used at
present to convert sugars and vegetable
oils are not particularly efficient, but
research is underway to enhance this
aspect.
v. Further work is necessary to examine
aspects of storage and handling of these
fuels, and their impact on health, safety
and the environment.
vi. The presently perceived disadvantages
of di-methyl ether in terms of its lubricity
and corrosive issues together with
creating sufficient production and supply
require resolution.
3.3 Liquid natural gas
(LNG)
The burning of natural gas in internal
combustion engines is not a new concept.
Neither is its use associated with dieselelectric propulsion or mechanical drive
systems for ships. A significant step in
the adoption of natural gas as a fuel
has been the Dual Fuel Diesel-Electric
systems on LNG carriers that are either
being built or already in service. However,
ship operating philosophies have varied
between companies. Some operators
prefer to use conventional heavy fuel oil
when its cost is lower than the commercial
value of boil-off gas from the LNG tanks; or
when the ship is running with limited LNG
on board in the ballast condition or during
lay-up. In this case the need for a shipboard
re-liquefaction is limited. However, it can
be installed so that on the occasions when
the boil-off cargo exceeds the ship’s fuel
requirements the additional boil-off fluid
can be returned to the cargo tanks. By
way of contrast, a large fleet of ships has
been built using the opposite philosophical
viewpoint. These ships operate on heavy
fuel oil and use a large liquefaction plant
to reliquefy all of the boil-off LNG: this
auxiliary plant also runs on heavy fuel oil.
Consequently, these latter ships deliver all
the cargo loaded and use heavy fuel oil for
the ships’ operational energy needs.
Given the recent volatility of world oil
prices the price of LNG in terms of net
energy value has been consistently lower
by a significant margin. Furthermore, the
availability of LNG is growing at a fast rate
from both conventional and shale gas
reserves. Consequently, the attractiveness
of LNG as a marine fuel, subject to the
logistical hurdles being overcome, has been
growing in strength.
The principal constituent of LNG is CH4
which, when used as a fuel, reduces CO2
emissions by around 25%. Additionally, the
lesser amount of nitrogen in the combustion
process, due to the compression ratios and
combustion temperatures for CH4, reduces
NOX production by around 85%. This meets
the MARPOL Annex VI, Tier 3 limits without
the need for selective catalytic reduction.
Furthermore, since sulphur is absent from
the fuel, no SOX emissions are produced. In
the context of the EEDI the use of LNG as a
fuel with its associated CO2 savings would
reduce the Actual EEDI for a ship by 25%.
When liquefied, the storage space required
for natural gas is about four times higher
than for conventional fuels. There is also
a need for well-insulated tanks and a
safe area in case of accidental spillage.
Consequently, the required storage space
on a vessel will be greater than that needed
for conventional fuel oils which may impact
on the available cargo volume for the ship.
Clearly, however, there are many alternative
tank arrangements that might be adopted
as well as a number of system alternatives
by which LNG can be utilised for propulsion
purposes. One option comprises a slow
speed, gas injection engine with LNG
delivered under pressure to the engine.
The fuel is then vaporised at the engine,
thereby making the process safer, easier to
install and operate rather than delivering
high-pressure natural gas from the fuel
tanks. With this arrangement, high gas
injection pressures are needed so as to
overcome the cylinder pressure in the upper
part of the piston stroke as well as being
able to get the required mass of gas into
the cylinder within a short time interval. An
alternative arrangement is a low-pressure
two stroke dual-fuel engine. This has the
low pressure LNG gas admitted by valves
around the cylinder at the bottom of the
stroke which is then ignited by pilot fuel at
the end of compression. A further option is
the established DFDE system used on LNG
carriers which has now also been deployed
on a passenger ferry. In another context,
if a cruise ship used LNG as a propulsion
fuel, evaporating the fuel could be used
to provide cooling in the air conditioning
system.
Future ship powering options 29
Primary propulsion options
There are many
land-based
fuel oil burning
power plants
that have been
converted to run
on gas… similar
conversions are
feasible on ships
In cases where a ship is lying at anchor or
delayed in port and a reliquification plant
is not fitted, then methane may have to
be vented or burnt off to maintain tank
pressures at acceptable levels. This would
result in reduced operational efficiency and
add to the global warming burden.
The coldness of LNG can be used to cool
the inlet air of a prime mover to 5°C. For
a gas turbine this is particularly effective
and enables the turbine to be run at 110%
of its rated efficiency, even when ambient
temperatures would otherwise produce
an inlet temperature of 38°C. Such an inlet
temperature would imply running at 73%
efficiency which is a gain of 50% overall.
(TICA 2012)
Dual-fuel engine experience of well over
a million hours shows that times between
overhauls are extended and component
lifetime is longer; the combustion space in
the engines has remained much cleaner and
products of combustion in turbochargers
and lubricating oils are much less of a
problem.
Offshore supply vessels and ferries have
now been built to operate on LNG where
the availability of the fuel exists: Figure 3.4
shows the example of the MF Fanafjord
which operates a short sea crossing in a
Norwegian Fjord and uses spark ignition
gas engines.
Figure 3.4 MF Fanafjord:
an LNG fuelled ferry
There are many land-based fuel oil burning
power plants that have been converted to
run on gas due to restrictions on emissions
having been imposed in the country of
operation and/or where the price and
availability of gas is more favourable.
Similar conversions are feasible on ships.
A recent example is the chemical carrier
mv Bit Viking which had its twin diesel
engines converted for operation in the
Baltic and Norwegian waters on LNG. The
conversion process included the cylinder
heads and liners, pistons and rings, the
connecting rods and turbochargers. In
addition, gas rails and admission valves
together with a pilot fuel system were
required. For this, in the case of the Bit
Viking, two 500m3 storage tanks were
mounted on the open deck giving the ship
12 days of operation at 80% load between
bunkers. More recently, in December 2012,
an order was placed for a pair of liquefied
natural gas-powered Jones Act 3,100 teu
containerships. These ships are dual-fuel
vessels and are planned for delivery in 2015
and 2016. The ships, which are reportedly
more expensive to build, are planned to
operate along the west coast of the United
States of America, which falls within an ECA,
as well as during one third of a FloridaPuerto Rico voyage which is also is in the
ECA. For these ships it is planned to use LNG
as the primary fuel at all times, with diesel
serving as backup.
Unlike the current diesel bunkering
infrastructure for the majority of seagoing
ships, there is presently a lack of a similar
system for the supply of LNG to support the
operation of LNG-fuelled ships. However,
a number of major commercial ports on
the world trade routes have LNG terminals
in the vicinity which serve land-based
consumers and these facilities might be
adapted to additionally serve the marine
community. This would require additional
financial investment as well as the provision
of a bunker fleet or safe bunkering jetties.
Indeed, some ports already have plans
for such investment, typical of which is
Singapore, but rather more supply ports
would be required before LNG-fuelled deep
sea ships could be considered totally viable.
In Europe a second jetty is being built in
the port of Zeebrugge to accommodate
ships between 1,500m3 and Q-Flex sizes
and Antwerp already bunkers LNG-fuelled
inland waterway barges. As such, the LNG
bunkering distribution network will embrace
Scandinavia, Belgium and The Netherlands
with further plans developing. In the case
of short sea ferry or inter-island type
routes, then either bespoke local terminals
or supply by road tanker may provide a
solution.
Since classification society rules already
exist for the burning of LNG fuel in ships and
coupled with the design and operational
experience having been satisfactory to
date, there is little of a technical nature that
would prevent the adoption of LNG as a
marine fuel. Any constraints would largely
derive from commercial considerations and
relate in significant measure to the likely
future price differentials between LNG and
conventional fuels as well as availability
at ports.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. LNG fuelling of reciprocating engines
as a known technology and service
experience, albeit limited at the present
time, has been satisfactory.
ii. The benefits in terms of CO2, NOX, SOX
and the other emissions are significant.
iii. Designs for suitable marine propulsion
machinery systems exist.
iv. It is relatively easy to convert many
existing marine engines to burn LNG.
v. Currently LNG fuel is considerably
cheaper than the conventional range of
marine fuels.
Disadvantages
i. Methane slip has to be avoided during
the bunkering and combustion processes
of new and in-service engines since
this is damaging in the context of
greenhouse gases.
ii. There is a general lack of a worldwide
bunkering infrastructure at present.
iii. LNG requires a heat source to evaporate
it to form the gas. As well as using the
inlet air to the prime mover, it may be
possible to use a heat exchanger with
sea water, but some fuel is likely to be
needed to be burned to provide this lowgrade heat.
3.4 Gas turbines
Gas turbines were first introduced into
warship propulsion in the 1950s to facilitate
high speed sprint modes of operation since
their power density was high. A further
operational advantage was the relative ease
with which gas turbines could be started
and stopped which gave rapid access to high
levels of power. Gas turbines can be used
either in purely mechanical propulsion drive
configurations or alternatively to generate
electricity, which is then used by electric
drives to propel the ship. This gave rise to
a variety of hybrid powering arrangements
involving combinations of gas turbines
with steam turbines (COSAG); with diesel
engines (CODAG) and with diesel generators
(CODLAG) to accommodate the evolving
power requirements of a modern warship:
typically loiter, towed array deployment,
cruise and sprint modes.
[Courtesy A. Greig]
30 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 31
Primary propulsion options
In the 1950s Shell
experimented
with a gas turbine
in the tanker,
Auris, while the
liberty ship John
Sergeant was
retrofitted with
an industrial gas
turbine
Introduction of the gas turbine into the
merchant service was more gradual by
comparison with naval applications. Apart
from early full-scale hull resistance research
exercises using the Clyde paddle steamer
Lucy Ashton at the end of its commercial
service life, there were a number of early
applications of gas turbines. In the 1950s
Shell experimented with a gas turbine in
the tanker, Auris, while the liberty ship John
Sergeant was retrofitted with an industrial
gas turbine. Then around 1968 the RoRo
ship Adm W.M Callaghan was built having
two aero-derived Pratt & Whitney FT4
gas turbines and leased to the USN Sea
Lift command. In 1971 the containership
Euroliner also featured two Pratt & Whitney
FT4 gas turbines and sailed between the
US and Europe. The twin screw high-speed
ferry Finnjet in Baltic Sea followed during
1977 and then more recently with cruise
ships including the Millennium Class and
Queen Mary 2 in the early 2000s. As with
naval ships, these latter vessels were
designed as combined cycle ships with
combinations of gas turbines and dieselelectric generators.
For the merchant ship gas turbine market
two types of prime mover made their
appearance: the aero-derivative and the
industrial gas turbines. The former were
able to supply high power but requiring the
use of high grades of fuel, while the latter
generally gave more modest levels of power
but used poorer grades of fuel as well
as offering easier maintenance regimes.
Typical of the latter application were the
HS1500 high-speed catamaran car ferries
which operated for a time on a number of
routes around the United Kingdom and
elsewhere.
Figure 3.5 mt30 marine gas turbine. This photograph
is reproduced with the permission of Rolls-Royce plc,
A range of commercially available aeroderivative gas turbines have been designed
for the marine market; these include the
LM2500, the WR21 and the MT30,
Figure 3.5. Earlier machines included the
Olympus and Tyne gas turbines. In the case
of the MT30 this has a maximum rating
of 40MW at 15 ºC and a thermal efficiency
of just over 40%. Consequently this fits
the power requirements of a number of
merchant ship types and sizes. The WR21
was a further development in marine gas
turbine technology with variable inlet
turbine stator vanes and incorporating
both compressor inter-cooling and exhaust
heat recuperation technologies. This
thermodynamic arrangement was designed
to deliver low specific fuel consumption
together with a thermal efficiency in the
region of 43%. This engine is used as a
source of power for the Type 45 destroyers
of the Royal Navy. Additionally, the WR21
has an enhanced part-load performance.
Gas turbines have the advantage of low
weight when compared to their diesel
engine equivalents: typically the MT30
unit weighs about 28 tonnes including
the enclosure and ancillary components.
This weight advantage, therefore, allows
designers considerable flexibility in locating
gas turbines in a ship when a turbo-electric
drive is specified.
The advanced modern aero-derivative
gas turbine units are designed to burn
commercially available distillate fuels which
meet the current legislation on emissions
and smoke requirements. Distillate fuels,
however, are considerably more expensive
than the conventional marine fuels burnt in
diesel engines used by merchant ships: for
example, the ratio of distillate fuel price to
an average of 180 cSt and 380 cSt bunker
fuel was 1.5 in October 2012 (Bunkerworld
2012). For this reason they are not currently
favoured in the merchant marine industry.
A further variation of gas turbine
technology is the combination of a gas
turbine with a heat recovery steam turbine
running on the flue gases, enabling a
rather greater overall thermal efficiency for
electricity generation.
Figure 3.6 ns Savannah
[Courtesy J.S. Carlton]
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Gas turbines represent a proven high
power density propulsion technology.
ii. Their low weight gives considerable
flexibility when locating them in a ship.
iii.NOX emissions are low and SOX emissions
negligible because higher grades of fuel
are burnt.
iv. Maintenance is normally running hoursbased and the turbines can be removed
from the ship for replacement relatively
easily.
Disadvantages
i. The fuel for aero-derivative gas turbines
is currently expensive when compared to
conventional marine fuels because it is a
high distillate fuel.
ii. All gas turbines are less efficient as the
ambient temperature rises, and this
is particularly true of aero-derivative
turbines (TICA 2012).
iii. Thermal efficiencies are lower than for
diesel engines of similar power.
OTHER PROPULSION
TECHNOLOGY
OPTIONS
3.5 Nuclear
Existing onboard energy storage and
power generation systems predominantly
develop power by breaking chemical bonds
between atoms. In contrast, nuclear power
generation is the fission of large, heavy
nuclei into smaller fission products under
controlled chain reactions; (Appendix 6).
This releases a large amount of heat
energy which is transferred to a coolant to
generate useable power via an appropriate
thermodynamic cycle. Nuclear propulsion,
therefore, represents a potentially radical
solution by being a CO2-free propulsion
source when operating.
Nuclear ship propulsion is not new, it
was first introduced into the submarine
environment, together with stringent
crew selection, education and training
regimes, by Admiral Rickover of the
United States Navy in 1955 when the
USN Nautilus sailed on its maiden voyage.
Since that time, some 700 nuclear reactors
have served at sea and today there
are around 200 reactors providing the
power to propel ships and submarines.
Shortly after the naval initiatives the NS
Savannah (Figure 3.6) was conceived as a
passenger cargo demonstrator ship under
© Rolls-Royce plc 2013
32 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 33
Primary propulsion options
Molten salt
reactors are
possible future
candidates for
ship propulsion,
however, a
lengthy period
of research and
development is
necessary for
this to happen.
President Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace
programme. Following the NS Savannah
in the 1960s, the Otto Hahn and Mutsu
came from Germany and Japan respectively:
again both ships being largely designed
as demonstrators for nuclear propulsion.
Since that time, a relatively small number
of other nuclear-propelled merchant ships
have been built, most notably the Russian
icebreaker classes with perhaps the most
famous being the Lenin, as well as a number
of dual purpose ships engaged on specialist
duties, such as the Yamal and, more
recently, the 50 Years of Victory which
are combined passenger cruise ships and
icebreakers.
There are several potential fuels, modes
of fission and reactor coolants that could
be used for merchant ship propulsion.
However, the most common reactor type
is the uranium-fuelled pressurised water
reactor. Natural uranium comprises three
isotopes: 238U, 99.3%; 235U, 0.7% and 234U,
0.005%. The fissile component in the fuel is
235
U where neutrons emitted in the fission
process are slowed down (moderated)
by the coolant (water) before causing
fissions in further 235U atoms. The energy
absorbed by the coolant is transferred to
a secondary steam cycle that generates
either electricity or direct shaft power. In
PWR reactors only a small percentage of
naturally occurring uranium is fissionable,
235
U, which implies that uranium has to be
enriched in its 235U component. While it is
possible to achieve virtually any level of
enrichment that is desired, uranium for use
in civilian programmes is generally around
5% of 235U. Levels of enrichment of 20%
or greater are subject to stringent controls
due to international safeguards and nuclear
weapons proliferation concerns and are only
used in specialist or military applications.
Another potential source of fissionable
uranium fuel is thorium which is more
plentiful than uranium and typically exists
in the soil in concentrations of around 6
ppm. Development in various parts of the
world is being undertaken to produce a
robust reactor for this fuel source which has
a further advantage in that the half-lives
of the irradiated products are generally
considerably shorter than those from
natural uranium based fuels. Thorium-based
reactors, depending on their configuration,
may only produce some 3% of the high
level waste developed by current nuclear
reactors and have a lower weapons
proliferation risk than conventional
uranium-plutonium cycle reactors. However
some thorium reactors require starter fuels
to grow the fissile 233U. Therefore, they do
not displace some level of security being
deployed.
Thorium Reactors
A number of options exist for utilising
the energy contained in Thorium all of
which involve the breeding of Th into
233
U. Typically these are:
• Solid fuel in a light water reactor.
• Liquid metal cooled fast breeder
reactor.
• Gas-cooled fast breeder reactor.
• Sub-critical accelerator driven.
• Molten salt reactor.
Each of these options has relative
advantages and disadvantages and
in some cases they are currently at
the theoretical concept stage: China
announced in early 2011 that it was
starting a molten salt thorium reactor
programme. Molten salt reactors
embrace a family of reactor designs
that use a mixture of molten fluoride,
or chloride salts as the coolant with
operating temperatures of the
order of 650ºC. More recently an
investigation has been undertaken
to assess the potential for molten
salt reactors to power warships
(Hill et. al. 2012).
Table 3.2 Proposed
small modular reactor
designs
Table 3.3 Typical
power requirements
for large ships
34 Royal Academy of Engineering
Molten salt reactors are possible
future candidates for ship propulsion,
however, a lengthy period of research
and development is necessary for this to
happen. Nevertheless, some of their relative
merits and disadvantages are discussed in
Appendix 6.
steam generators. The others are integral
plants, with the steam generators inside the
reactor pressure vessel. Currently, the US
Department of Energy is co-sponsoring a
project to examine the cost-effectiveness
of small modular reactors in the region
of 180MW.
The era of nuclear power began with
reactors that had low power output,
typically tens of MW. Over time, economies
of scale have produced the latest
generation of power plants which generate
up to 4.5 GW of thermal power yielding
1.0 to 1.6 GW electric. These are far too
large for shipboard application; however,
recently interest in a new type of reactor,
the small modular reactor, has arisen.
These reactors are much smaller in terms
of power output and physical size and are
intended to be constructed in a modular
fashion involving a significant element of
factory build. The underlying economic
principle with these modular reactors is
that economies of scale are traded for
economies of mass production. There are
several small modular reactor designs,
(Table 3.2), that have appropriate power
outputs which are suitable for large ship
powering applications (Table 3.3). The
small modular reactors identified in Table
3.2 are all are PWR. Moreover, the KLT 405,
VBER 150 and SMR units are derived from
submarine reactor plants and have separate
The design and regulatory process
To design and build nuclear-powered
merchant ships significant changes to the
normal design procedures are required.
The process would be driven by a safety
case in which the building, operation,
maintenance and decommissioning of
the ship are the principal features. The
safety case would embrace the nuclear,
mechanical, electro-technical and naval
architectural aspects of the ship design with
the safety and integrity of the nuclear plant
taking precedence. Within this concept
the process of undertaking the safety
analysis would typically split the ship into
a series of subsystems: some having real
and others virtual boundaries. The analysis
would consider the effects of a failure
occurring in one of the subsystems on the
nuclear power plant and vice versa. With
such a procedure all parties concerned with
the ship would need to be involved: this
would include the builder, classification
society, flag state and national nuclear
administration as well as the duty holder,
the ship owner. Moreover, the duty holder
Small reactor designs
Country of manufacturePower output (MWe)
KLT 40S
Russia OKBM
35
VBER 150
Russia OKBM
110
SMART
South Korea KAERI
100
MRX
JAERI30
SMR
United States of America Westinghouse
200
mPower
United States of America B+W
125
NuScale
United States of America NuScale Power
45
Ship type
SizeTypical power requirements (MW)
Bulk carrier
320000 dwt
30
Container ship
12000 TEU
80
Cruise ship
100000 dwt
70
Future ship powering options 35
Primary propulsion options
In any future
merchant ship
application
of nuclear
propulsion there
would need to
be cooperation
between IMO and
the IAEA to enable
their different
and extensive
sets of expertise
to be reflected in
design regulation
would be called upon to demonstrate to
an independent regulator their ability to
operate the ship in a proper and competent
manner. Furthermore, the entire process
would need to embrace the principles and
requirements defined by the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and adapted
for the marine environment; (Appendix 7).
In any future merchant ship application of
nuclear propulsion there would need to
be cooperation between IMO and the IAEA
to enable their different and extensive
sets of expertise to be reflected in design
regulation. Indeed, the role of land-based
nuclear regulators and the views of the flag
and port state controls would be critical
for any successful implementation of
marine nuclear propulsion. In this respect,
the trade routes upon which nuclear ships
could be deployed and the countries that
would be prepared to accept nuclearpowered merchant ships need careful
consideration. Moreover, given that ships
frequently sail between ports and through
territorial waters of different countries,
the processes for mutual acceptance and
recognition of nuclear certification would
become a key element in ship operation and
voyage planning. This scenario is further
complicated because national land-based
nuclear regulators around the world adopt
different approaches to demonstrate the
IAEA principles and requirements in their
certification processes. Consequently,
the port and flag state authorities, in
turn, are likely to depend on their national
approaches to satisfy themselves that
their dependent communities are suitably
protected. Notwithstanding nuclearpowered ships visiting ports in the normal
course of their duties, issues surrounding
the ship’s plant maintenance require
careful consideration. While normal hull
and structural maintenance is unlikely to
be a significant issue, any maintenance
involving either directly or indirectly the
nuclear plant would be of concern within
the safety case and the port regulations.
Indeed, small modular reactor plants may fit
well with these operational and duty holder
considerations.
In addition to the requirements imposed on
a nuclear-propelled ship, nuclear regulatory
arrangements would be applied to the shore
facilities used to support the shipboard
reactor plants. These arrangements would
need to be identified in the appropriate
safety cases and levels of security similar
to those currently applied to civil nuclear
power plants are likely to act as a basis for
the consideration.
Nuclear Codes, Rules and Applications
In 1981 the International Maritime Organisation adopted a Code of Safety for
Nuclear Merchant Ships, Resolution A.491(XII), and although it has not been
implemented it is still extant. However, although being relatively far-sighted at
the time of its adoption it would need to be updated to be aligned with the current
thinking on nuclear safety. Prior to that Resolution, Lloyd’s Register also maintained
a set of Provisional Rules for nuclear-propelled merchant ships between 1960 and
1976 and these have recently been revised for use by the marine industry in
design studies.
In addition to the full nuclear ship propulsion, there are a set of conventionally
powered ships which are used to transport nuclear fuel. These ships have systems
and redundancies built into their ship systems and have contributed to the thinking
on aspects of merchant marine nuclear safety. In another context, a series of nonpowered barges which have nuclear power plants installed on them for use in the
Arctic have also contributed in a similar way.
36 Royal Academy of Engineering
From the
health physics
perspective
the application
of nuclear
propulsion is
relatively well
understood.
Given the correct
design of the
shielding around
the reactor,
which is a known
technology, the
emitted radiation
dosage is very low
Ship design and operational
considerations
The quantity of fuel used in a PWR reactor
is considerably less than the amount of
conventional fuel burnt in conventionally
powered large ships. For example, the
mass of uranium fuel, enriched in 235U to
3.5%, which would be used by a 12,500
teu container ship undertaking a voyage at
25 knots from Rotterdam to a port on the
east coast of the United States of America
would amount to a few kilograms. This is in
contrast to some 1,550 tonnes of heavy fuel
oil that would normally be burnt. Nuclear
propulsion, if applied to merchant ships,
would therefore have the potential to
permit further concepts in ship design to be
contemplated: typically in the field of ship
speed or deadweight capacity; (Appendix 6).
In the case of a nuclear-propelled ship
requiring assistance while on passage, the
salvage or rescue processes demand careful
analysis. It is unlikely that the standard
Lloyd’s Form would suffice and amendment
to or reconstitution of that approach
would almost certainly be required. From
a machinery perspective such a scenario
would be an extreme case, since a nuclearpropelled ship would need to have an
auxiliary means of propulsion: particularly
if it was fitted with a single reactor plant.
Typically, this might be a diesel engine
capable of propelling the ship at six or seven
knots towards a safe haven. Alternatively,
if two independent small nuclear power
plants were provided then the need for an
auxiliary propulsion diesel engine may be
reduced.
From the health physics perspective the
application of nuclear propulsion is relatively
well understood. Given the correct design
of the shielding around the reactor, which is
a known technology, the emitted radiation
dosage is very low. Indeed, it is claimed that
submariners operating nuclear-propelled
submarines generally receive much lower
doses of radiation than the remainder
of the population. This is because when
underwater they are, for much of the
time, shielded from the natural radiation
sources which come either from space or
via the rocks and minerals within the Earth.
Nevertheless, a level of monitoring would
be required in the context of a crew member
trained in health physics and professionally
supported from the shore.
Nuclear plant ownership and safety
A key question relating to merchant ship
nuclear powering applications is whether
a nuclear plant is purchased or leased by
the ship owner. This question embraces
consideration of the cost of failures
occurring in the system: a situation which
has on occasions been extremely expensive
to solve in some naval installations. The
leasing option of standard nuclear plants,
such as small modular reactors, provided
they are built in sufficient numbers, would
help to distribute these costs between
different owners which would not be
the case for bespoke units. Furthermore,
if this concept were adopted, although
not relieving ship owners from their
responsibilities as duty holders, it may
simplify the execution of those duties
by the plant manufacturer undertaking
the complete machinery cycle through
the design, certification, manufacture,
operation and eventual disposal of the
propulsion plant. Indeed, the operation and
disposal aspects of the nuclear plant life
cycle are particularly onerous as both would
require detailed knowledge on the part of
the ship owner which, at present, few, if
any, would possess or wish to possess.
A further issue with regard to nuclear fuel
is that non-nuclear nations with shipping
interests might wish to take advantage of
leasing small modular reactors to prevent
them having to acquire nuclear technology
and material themselves in order to sail
commercial nuclear-powered ships on
their trade routes. Such a situation may
conceivably create a potential proliferation
issue which would need resolution prior to
the introduction of these power plants.
Future ship powering options 37
Operating fuel costs
Primary propulsion options
Fossil Fuel
Propulsion
Range of
fuel prices
Nuclear
Refuelling
interval
Figure 3.7 Schematic
outline for throughlife fuel cost analysis
Considering the
life cycle costs
of a ship, while
the nuclear
option has a
higher initial
capital cost, the
gradient of the
curve is much
shallower with
step increments
when refuelling
is required
If full plant ownership were contemplated
sea staff training programmes, analogous
to those operated by the navies who
use this technology, would be required.
Nevertheless, even with the leasing
model, assuming the leaser provides the
expert staff to operate the plant, some
level of expertise would still be required
of nuclear operation by the ship’s officers.
In both respects the current STCW Code
requirements are deficient. Moreover,
training would need to have a reactorspecific element with revision periods
and recertification being necessary. This
would have implications for some current
employment arrangements within the
merchant navy. Furthermore, shore-based
facilities would need a nuclear safety
organisation manned by suitably qualified
and experienced personnel.
Nuclear safety considerations will drive
different shore infrastructure requirements
from those currently in place for
conventionally propelled merchant ships.
These would impact on factories, shipyards,
ports and dockyards throughout the
whole life cycle of the nuclear propulsion
plant and, in so doing, would be a major
cost driver for nuclear powered merchant
shipping. There would be a number of life
cycle requirements that would need to be
satisfied: (Appendix 6).
As previously concluded when discussing
other related aspects of nuclear propulsion,
the small modular reactor concept may be of
assistance in simplifying these issues.
Cost models between nuclear and
conventional propulsion
Considering the life cycle costs of a ship,
while the nuclear option has a higher initial
capital cost, the gradient of the curve is
much shallower with step increments
when refuelling is required. In contrast,
conventional propulsion alternatives have
38 Royal Academy of Engineering
OECD (Regional)IAEA (Global)
Table 3.4 Nuclear
liability conventions
Ship life cycle
a lower initial cost but then an operating
cost gradient reflecting the fuel
consumption during the ship’s existence
with the average reflecting oil price changes
over shorter time intervals; (Figures 3.7).
If, however, fuelling for the life of the ship
were contemplated and possible for a
merchant ship, then the operating fuel costs
would become constant; that is, a straight
line on Figure 3.7 rather than the saw-tooth
characteristic shown in the figure.
Paris Convention 1960
Vienna Convention 1963
Brussels Convention 1963
Revised Vienna Convention 1997
Revised Paris & Brussels Conventions 2004
Convention on Supplementary Compensation 1997
have allowed the establishment of specialist
nuclear insurance pools which insure the
liabilities associated with nuclear facilities.
Table 3.4 shows the conventions in force at
present.
The implementation of insurance principles
in the merchant marine environment will
differ fundamentally from that which
applies to navies where governments take
a major role in underwriting the risk. This
is unlikely in the merchant service. This,
therefore, raises further issues relating
to the insurance of nuclear-propelled
merchant ships: in particular, the stance
of hull and machinery underwriters as
distinct from that of P&I Clubs. In the
former case, nuclear technology and its
mechanical risks are comparatively wellunderstood and, if not, lend themselves to
some level of probabilistic analysis of risk.
Cover would be restricted to exclude any
physical damage to the vessel’s machinery
arising from failure of the nuclear plant,
certainly that which results in radiation
release. Current policy conditions have a
standard restriction that excludes that type
of event. Some cover may be accessible,
but the capacity available to do so would
be restricted as underwriters reinsurance
programmes mirror that policy exclusion,
meaning any insurance share written would
be net without the benefit of reinsurance
protection. Secondly and more importantly,
issues such as ports of refuge, availability of
salvage services and formal vessel response
plans are key. While hull underwriters would
not provide cover for the direct effect of
nuclear and radiological effects of reactor
failure and consequent contamination it is
likely that conventional cover will be in place
otherwise, including salvage and sue and
Furthermore, there are issues concerning
the understanding of nuclear damage
for which operators must provide
compensation in the event of an incident.
Currently loss of life, personal injury, loss
of or damage to property and economic
loss related to the foregoing are insurable.
However, concerns remain: the full
insurability of the reinstatement of an
impaired environment, use or enjoyment
of the environment and preventative
measures. Additionally, in the maritime case
is the measurement of damage at sea.
A nuclear option would be more difficult to
finance because the initial cost has to be
paid upfront and the owner becomes a price
taker not a price setter: since there is no
choice but to take market rates to capture
income to amortise the cost of build. Clearly,
for the nuclear option other cost elements
arise about which little is known at
present: these include the cost of finance,
maintenance, pilotage, port dues, survey
fees and insurance. While these elements
are well known for conventionally propelled
ships, through-life fuel costs, while
reflecting the underlying market trends,
are likely to be significantly influenced by
future marine fuel policies. This is because
higher grades of fuel are, in present
terms, considerably more expensive and,
furthermore, any introduction of carbon tax
will only exacerbate this situation.
Assessing the risk posed by nuclear
propulsion is fundamental to the insurance
issue and Table 3.5 identifies the nuclear
perils, machinery risks and fire protection
issues that require assessment.
The issues highlighted in Table 3.5 are
principally the risk assessment principles of
land-based plants, however, in the marine
case the issue is further complicated. It
is a mobile platform with limited internal
space; has limited maintenance resources;
has operational imperative; risks arise from
the existence of hostile zones and the
attendant risk of a collision, grounding or
foundering hazard.
Insurance
Nuclear perils
Machinery risks
Fire protection
The key principles of nuclear liability are
established by international treaties which
influence national legislation and dictate
the scope of operator liability. Countries
are either signatories to the conventions
or have legislation that adheres to the
principles embodied within the conventions.
As such, nuclear liability insurance policies
must follow relevant national legislation
and often require government approval.
General non-nuclear risk insurance policies
have radioactive contamination exclusions;
these fulfil the channelling principle and
Reactor characteristics
Design authority, systems engineering
Fire hazard
Barriers to release
Adequacy or failure of maintenance – Predictive, preventive, corrective
Plant segregation and
compartmentalisation
Reactor protection
Equipment reliability
Fire detection
Radiation protection
Plant protection
Fire suppression
Accident mitigation
Condition monitoring
Fire water supply
Table 3.5 Risk
assessment issues
Emergency planning
Operating history
Control of hazardous
operations, ignition sources
Human factors
OEM support
Control of fire, loading and
housekeeping
Regulatory framework
Spare part availability and quality
Fire team
Terrorism and sabotage
Values
Fire drills
Future ship powering options 39
Primary propulsion options
40 Royal Academy of Engineering
Disadvantages
i. The conventional methods of planning,
building and operation of merchant ships
will need complete overhaul since the
process would be driven by a safety case
and systems engineering approach.
ii. There would be a number of additional
constraints imposed on the ship design
and operation.
iii. In contrast to the second advantage,
there is a relatively small number of
nuclear propulsion experts at all levels
and this will cause competition with
land-based installations.
iv. In contrast to conventional methods
of ship propulsion, there are further
issues surrounding the deployment
of nuclear technology which require
resolution. These include international
regulation; public perception; initial
capital cost and financing; training and
retention of crews; refuelling and safe
storage for spent fuel; the setting up
and maintenance of an infrastructure
Super store
Rechargeable-battery capacity
World trends. Wh/kg
400
New Li technologhy
300
200
Li-ion/Poly
0
In recent years, there have been significant
improvements, (Figure 3.8), and energy
and power density are becoming much
higher. These newer battery types can
be recharged more quickly; have lower
self discharge rates and are free of a
memory effect.
NiMH
100
NiCd
Dashed lines denote forecast data
Figure 3.8 World trends in rechargeable
battery capacity (Source: Avicenne)
2015
Nuclear propulsion has clear greenhouse
gas advantages and has been shown
to be a practical proposition with naval
ships and submarines as well in certain
specialised ships and demonstrator
projects. Considerable experience has
been accumulated in the operation of PWR
propulsion units, nevertheless considerable
difficulty and cost would be incurred in
developing a deep sea, international
merchant ship today. The difficulties would
arise from a number of aspects: design
execution and planning, operation, training
of crews and shore staff, nuclear regulation,
security, public perception, disposal and
so on. It has been seen that the concept of
small modular marinised reactor plants or
molten salt reactors may attenuate many
of these difficulties although not dispose of
them. As such, it would be prudent to keep a
watching brief on the development of these
technologies with a view to implementation
in the medium to long term.
The lead acid battery, the zinc-carbon dry
cell and the nickel-cadmium battery have
been the most common battery types
throughout much of the past 150 years.
During that time they have evolved little.
As storage media they variously exhibit
low energy density, low power density
or suffer from other weaknesses. These
include an unacceptable self discharge rate
or a memory effect in which the maximum
energy capacity of a partially discharged
battery is reduced with each re-charge.
Consequently, these attributes do not
commend them practically or economically
for large-scale use as an alternative means
of power for marine propulsion.
2010
Nuclear propulsion in the future
support system; and emergency
response plans.
v. Insurance is a major issue for merchant
ships that would require careful
consideration and resolution for
merchant ships.
vi. The non-technical issues need resolution
before nuclear propulsion could become
a realistic option for international
trade routes. This would take time to
implement and among these issues
number some national prejudices against
nuclear-propelled ships.
vii.Nuclear propulsion, due to these
constraints, should only be considered as
a medium- to long-term option.
3.6 Batteries
2000
In the alternative case of one member
of a P&I Club purchasing a nuclear ship
which was subsequently the subject
of a claim, this could expose the other
members of the mutual club to considerable
financial liability. Furthermore, from a P&I
perspective, which is third party rather than
first-party cover, the problem of cover for
radiation is magnified by definition.
lithium-air
batteries may
offer the promise
of a significant
energy density
multiplier above
the current best
performance
from lithiumion battery
technology
1990
As far as the radiation element of risk is
concerned, available cover would be limited
and expensive. Other solutions would
therefore be needed such as accessing
existing nuclear pools.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Nuclear ship propulsion during operation
emits no CO2, NOX, SOX, volatile organic
and particulate emissions.
ii. A significant documented body of
experience exists in the design and
safe operation of shipboard nuclear
propulsion plant: particularly in the case
of PWR designs.
iii. The nuclear power plant concepts are
suitable for merchant ship propulsion.
iv. Small modular marinised reactor or
molten salt reactor plants may attenuate
many of the difficulties associated with
nuclear propulsion although they will not
dispose of them.
v. Nuclear propulsion would offer further
flexibility for merchant ship design and
operational planning with respect to
ship speeds, hull form and ship numbers
deployed on a route.
vi. The costs of the fuel are initially paid for
along with the reactor plant and thereby
remove exposure to price fluctuations
for significant periods of operational
service.
1980
labour: costs incurred by common interests
in the maritime adventure to prevent or
mitigate loss. Therefore as insurers assess a
nuclear powered risk, it is likely they would
require:
• Confirmation that the route assumed has
sufficient on-call salvage services.
• That a formal vessel response plan is in
place (OPA 90 VRP provisions).
• That the coastal states en-route have
formal port of refuge arrangements in
place.
1970
Nuclear
propulsion
has clear
greenhouse gas
advantages and
has been shown
to be a practical
proposition with
naval ships and
submarines
Although they provide better performance,
these newer battery types do not as yet
generally satisfy the marine propulsion
needs. In this sector significant power is
required and for all but the shortest of
coastal voyages, the power output has
usually to be sustained for some days.
However, new technologies in this or any
other area need care in their introduction
in terms of performance and reliability.
New battery chemistries include metalsulphur, where the metal is magnesium,
sodium or lithium or metal-oxygen – also
referred to as metal-air where the metal
is zinc, lithium or sodium. Currently the
leading contender is the lithium-air battery.
Theoretically a lithium-air battery can
liberate 11,780 Wh from the oxidation of
one kilogram of lithium. Unlike most other
batteries, which carry the necessary oxidant
within the battery, the lithium-air battery
draws in oxygen from the atmosphere
during discharge and liberates it during
charging. Hence, lithium-air batteries can
be very light but require a means of supply
and removal air: analogous to a fossilfuelled engine.
Despite the high theoretical energy density
of lithium-air battery technology, the
currently achieved performance is below
that initially expected from a practical
device; that is, 2,000 Wh/kg. Nevertheless,
the development of lithium-air batteries is
at an early stage and has encountered both
successes and setbacks; including problems
with capacity fading, cycle life, a noticeable
mismatch in charging and discharge voltage
as well as in limitations in the rate of oxygen
diffusion. Given that many research groups
are working in this technical area, lithiumair batteries may offer the promise of a
significant energy density multiplier above
the current best performance from lithiumion battery technology.
Despite the potential of lithium-air
batteries, many companies in Japan, China,
South Korea, Europe and the USA consider
that lithium-ion battery performance can be
significantly improved. There is, therefore,
the provision of significant research
funding for improving lithium-ion battery
performance as well as developing other
post-lithium-ion battery technologies.
A report (IDTechEx 2011) explored the pattern
of patenting activities in the advanced
Future ship powering options 41
Primary propulsion options
energy storage sector over the prior
seven-year period. Their report showed
that four companies have approximately
8,500 applications between them which
indicate an intense level of activity in the
field of energy storage. In addition, many
small, typically university-derived, spin-off
companies are pursuing narrowly focused
innovations and some of their efforts may
prove significant in the future.
With regard to raw material availability,
world deposits of lithium are comparatively
limited. There is a consensus that global
reserves of lithium are between 10–11
million tonnes with the majority vested in
Chile (IEEE). Therefore, if a growing adoption
of lithium-based batteries takes place
the rate of consumption of the limited
global stock and costs of lithium may be
expected to increase. An alternative battery
technology that may address this risk is the
magnesium-ion battery. Active research
programmes are underway and there
are optimistic reports that rechargeable
magnesium-ion batteries, using the best
new cathode materials, could deliver
a threefold increase in energy density
compared to lithium-ion: about the same
improvement as that forecast for lithiumair. Moreover, magnesium is more common
than lithium. Its crustal abundance is 29,000
ppm whereas for lithium it is 17ppm and in
the oceans the abundance of magnesium
and lithium is 1,290 ppm and 0.17 ppm
respectively.
Estimates forecast that by 2030 the cost
of both lithium-air and lithium-ion battery
packs will be similar and extra large battery
packs suitable for marine propulsion may
cost somewhat less per kWh. Although
magnesium currently costs about 1/20
of that of lithium, there are other costs
in the construction of a battery. The cost
of recharging will be linked to the cost of
electricity needed to refill the batteries. In
the case of marine propulsion this could be
provided by a range of renewable sources
feeding the national grid into the port.
A new battery technology spun-out of
Stanford University (Stanford 1&2) is the allelectron battery which is claimed to have
much higher power and energy density than
is available from a chemical battery together
with a significantly lower cost/kWh.
In a related technology, energy storage
based on super-capacitors has been
implemented on a small 22 m passenger
ferry, the Ar Vag Tredan; (Figure 3.9).
This ship makes short voyages of around
2.5 nm in sheltered waters at a maximum
speed of 10 knots. The energy storage in
the super-capacitors is enough to permit
one round trip and recharging is done during
unloading and loading of the passengers
from shore-power. The recharging takes
four minutes via a 400V supply at the stem
of the ferry. In addition, photovoltaic panels
contribute to the electrical energy used by
navigation equipment.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Battery-based propulsion of merchant
ships is beneficial from the CO2, NOX, SOX,
volatile organic and particulate emissions
points of view since during operation
none occur.
ii. Batteries, by virtue of the rapidly
developing technology surrounding
them, offer a potential solution for the
propulsion of smaller ships in the medium
to long term.
iii. Batteries in conjunction with other
modes of propulsion may offer a
potential hybrid solution for the
propulsion of small- to medium-sized
ships.
Disadvantages
i. At present, the size of the necessary
battery pack would preclude their use
as the sole means of propulsion in all
but the smallest of ships on short sea
voyages.
ii. Full battery propulsion must await
further technical development and even
then it is likely to be confined to the
smaller ship end of the market.
iii. The battery pack requires replacement
when it reaches its life as determined by
the total number of charge/discharge
cycles.
3.7 Fuel cells
Invented in 1838, the fuel cell predates
the four stroke spark ignition engine and
the diesel engine. For more than a century
it was little more than an engineering
curiosity as there was neither the need
nor the means to develop it. Interest was
rekindled in fuel cells as the space race
progressed for three reasons: their mass
is low, the only exhaust product is water
and materials technology had developed
sufficiently to enable their promised high
efficiency to become a reality.
Fuel cells, like a battery, produce energy
from an electro-chemical process rather
than combustion. Fuel cells have no moving
parts but do require additional support plant
such as pumps, fans and humidifiers. Two
reactants, typically hydrogen and oxygen,
combine within the fuel cell to produce
water, releasing both electrical energy
and some thermal energy in the process.
Unlike a conventional battery in which
the reactants consumed in the energy
conversion process are stored internally
and eventually depleted, the reactants
consumed by the fuel cell are stored
externally and are supplied to the fuel cell in
an analogous way to a conventional diesel
engine. Hence a fuel cell has the potential to
produce power as long as it has a supply of
reactants.
Many values are quoted for the efficiency
of a fuel cell and all should be treated with
caution and considered in context. The
fuel types, storage conditions, inclusion
of a reformer and type of output power
must all be considered. A comparison of
fuel cell performance with that of diesel
engines should be not be based on simply
considering the engines themselves: the
whole propulsion chain should be taken
into account particularly as diesel engines
produce rotary output and fuel cells DC
electrical output. One view is to consider the
theoretical maximum efficiency of a heat
Figure 3.9 Ar Vag Tredan
super-capacitor driven
ferry [Courtesy stx-Lorient]
42 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 43
Efficiency %
Primary propulsion options
90
Fuel cell and heat engine combined cycle
80
70
60
Hydrogen
50
Heat engine
40
PEMFC PAFC
MCFC
SOFC
1000
800
600
400
0
0
[Larminie and Dicks 2000]
30
200
Figure 3.10 Theoretical heat
engine and fuel cell efficiencies
gas by converting methane into hydrogen
within the fuel cell itself; termed internal
reformation. The disadvantage is that
carbon in the fuel is converted into CO2.
Temperature ºC
engine and a fuel cell; Figure 3.10. The heat
engine limit is calculated using the Carnot
cycle with a lower reservoir temperature
of 100 ºC. The fuel cell is supplied directly
with gaseous hydrogen and oxygen, not
air. With the exception of fuels cells used
in space and submarines, air is substituted
for oxygen as one of the reactants. Using
air, with the normal 21% oxygen content,
reduces efficiency but this is offset by the
free supply as in the case of diesel engines.
The high temperature fuel cells have the
potential to achieve efficiencies similar to
if not better than those of large marine
diesel engines, especially if they are
combined with a steam plant to make use
of their thermal output. Table 3.6 shows
an alternative evaluation together with
comparative specific powers and power
densities. While efficiencies are similar,
diesel engines significantly outperform fuel
cells in terms of specific powers and power
densities.
In Table 3.6 the values are roughly
estimated and based on available product
documentation for the fuel cells as well as
DNV’s Internal Report No. 2010–0605 for
the combustion engines. Estimated electric
efficiencies are based on the lower heating
value of the relevant fuel and specific power
and power density are compared for two
types of fuel cell power packs and two types
of internal combustion engine.
The proton exchange membrane fuel cell is
classified as low temperature and is being
developed for the automotive market,
among other applications, in the 1–300
kW range. The phosphoric acid fuel cell
is also low temperature and has a higher
power band, typically 10kW to 1MW, but
is not suitable for marine applications due
to the nature of its electrolyte. The direct
methanol fuel cell is a third low temperature
fuel cell which uses methanol as its
hydrogen source. The high temperature
fuel cells, molten carbonate and solid
oxide fuel cells, can be built for much
larger powers from a few kilowatts up to
10MW and, therefore, are candidates for
main propulsion as well as auxiliary power
generators.
A major issue for fuel cells is their fuels:
oxygen can be obtained from air but
hydrogen is more of a challenge. One
option is a direct supply of hydrogen, but
at present bulk storage is problematic,
(Section 3.9), and the infrastructure
is lacking. The external reformation of
diesel is an alternative and is seen as a
viable alternative for the military which
uses high distillate fuel. However, it is
more challenging to reform the low-cost,
heavy fuel oil commonly used by the
merchant marine. A more realistic shorterterm scenario for marine fuel cell power
generation would be operation by natural
gas. A number of high temperature fuel cells
are capable of operating directly on natural
Electric power generatorElectric efficiency
(%)
Table 3.6 Characteristic
properties of two fuel
cell types and two types
of combustion engines.
[DNV 2012]
44 Royal Academy of Engineering
Specific power)Power density
(kW/m2
(W/kg)
Fuel cell (MCFC)
45–50
3
15
Fuel cell (HTPEM)
≈ 45
30
60
Marine diesel (4 stroke)
40
80
90
Marine gas (4 stroke)
45
80
90
Until recently, fuel cell development in the
marine field has been limited, the exception
being Air Independent Propulsion for
submarines and Autonomous Underwater
Vehicles. The first practical application of
a fuel cell for motive power in a submarine
was in 1964 when Allis-Chalmers produced
a 750kW fuel cell for the Electric Boat
Company to power a one-man underwater
research vessel. More recently, Siemens,
at the behest of the German government,
developed a successful 120kW PEMFC fuel
cell for the German navy. A pair of these
units is used for the AIP pack in the Class
214 submarines which were constructed
for a number of navies, including those
of South Korea and Greece. The Class
209 boats, which were mainly produced
for export, are offered with a 6m long
AIP extension and retrofitting to existing
boats is an option. Both submarine types
carry liquid oxygen, internally for the 209
and externally for the 214, and store the
hydrogen in external metal hydride tanks.
Fuel cells are also used for autonomous
underwater vehicles; the Hugin series, built
by Kongsberg, uses an aluminium-oxygen
semi-fuel cell. The hydrogen peroxide fuel,
electrolyte and the anodes reportedly
require frequent replacement.
Some small ferries have been used to
demonstrate fuel cell technology. At
Expo2000 the msWeltfrieden was fitted
with a 10kW PEM fuel cell, where the
hydrogen was stored in metal hydride. Since
2008 ZEMSHIPS’ (zero emissions ships)
Alsterwasser, a 100-person passenger
ferry, has been in use on the Alster River in
Hamburg. This ferry is powered by a pair of
48kW PEM fuel cells using air and hydrogen,
the latter being stored as pressurised gas.
The European Commission under the
5th, 6th and 7th Framework programmes
has funded studies, research and
demonstrators. Early projects included fuel
cell technology in Ships (FCSHIP) (2002–
2004) and New-H-Ship (2004–2006).
These programmes assessed the technical
feasibility of installing fuel cells on ships
followed by a number of demonstrator
projects (EC 2002–2006). The projects had
a strong representation from the Nordic
countries, including Iceland, who saw fuel
cells as a catalyst for developing a hydrogen
economy. Nordic countries, in particular
Iceland, have huge reserves of hydro- and
geothermal power with which to produce
green hydrogen: that is, production without
significantly adding to the greenhouse
gas burden. A more recent project moved
away from hydrogen as a fuel, MC-WAP –
molten-carbonate fuel cells for waterborne
applications (2005–2011). The purpose of
this initiative was to study the application of
the molten carbonate fuel cell technology
onboard large vessels, such as Ro/Pax,
Ro/Ro and cruise ships. This included the
design, construction, installation on board
and testing of a 500 kW auxiliary power unit,
powered by MCFC and fuelled by diesel oil.
Project METHAPU (Validation of renewable
methanol based auxiliary power systems
for commercial vessels) (2006–2010)
developed a methanol/air SOFC for use
in marine applications. A prototype 20kW
unit, produced by Wärtsilä, was installed
aboard the Swedish Wallenius Lines car
carrier mv Undine to assist in auxiliary
power production. So far the programme
has demonstrated the ability of SOFC
technology to withstand the demands of
the marine environment and data analysis
is proceeding. While methanol requires a
number of additional precautions, when
compared to conventional fuels, it was
demonstrated that it could safely be used
without major deviations from operating
procedures or ship constructional methods.
Moreover, it was shown that the use of
this fuel would present no greater risk to
the ship, its occupants or the environment
than would normally be attributed to
conventional marine machinery. PaFCXell
is a German-funded project currently
underway to investigate the integration of
small PEM fuel cells into the auxiliary power
generation grid of a cruise ship.
Future ship powering options 45
Primary propulsion options
Figure 3.12 The Flettner
rotor ship Baden-Baden,
formerly the Buckau.
Image courtesy of Wikimedia
Commons
Figure 3.11 The hybrid
propulsion ship
mv Viking Lady
© Viking Lady
FellowSHIP is a joint industry research
and development project with the aim
of developing and demonstrating hybrid
fuel cell power packs, especially usable
for marine and offshore use: the partners
include two major diesel manufacturers,
Wärtsilä and MTU, as well as DNV. The
FellowSHIP project has successfully
installed a 330 kW MCFC operating on LNG
aboard the Norwegian shipping company
Eidesvik’s 6,200 dwt hybrid propulsion
Viking Lady; (Figure 3.11). This fuel cell
operates in conjunction with four generator
sets that can run on either diesel or LNG.
They have successfully demonstrated
smooth operation for over 7,000 hours
which suggests that fuel cells can be
adapted for stable, high-efficiency, lowemission onboard operation. When internal
consumption was taken into account, the
electric efficiency was estimated to be
44.5 % with no NOX, SOX and PM emissions
detectable. If heat recovery was enabled,
the overall fuel efficiency was increased to
55%; however, there remains potential for
further increasing these performance levels
An additional
benefit for
the military is
that fuel cells
are very quiet
compared to
diesel engines
46 Royal Academy of Engineering
(DNV, 2012). Nevertheless, fuel cells, due to
the Nernst equation, cannot use all the fuel
since the concentration of the reactants
dictates the voltage. So essentially 15 to
20% of the fuel (hydrogen) is left in the
anode outlet and should be used otherwise.
The part load efficiency of fuel cells, in
contrast to diesel engines and gas turbines,
frequently shows an increase at lower loads.
However in particular with external, and to
a lesser extent, with internal reforming, the
supply of the fuel could impede dynamic
loading and fast transients.
In the longer term however, it is the
operating environment and adoption
of electric as opposed to mechanical
transmission that is expected to change
in favour of the fuel cell. Indeed, green
hydrogen, generated using renewable
energy ashore and consumed in hydrogenfuelled fuel cells onboard ships, may offer
a solution. In such an ideal operating
environment, the benefits of fuel cell
technology could be fully exploited.
Fuel Cell Applications
The US Navy, US Coast Guard and other navies have undertaken a number of studies
for the installation of fuel cells. An additional benefit for the military is that fuel cells
are very quiet compared to diesel engines. A detailed concept study was conducted
into replacing a diesel generator set for the US Coastguard’s USCGC Vindicator by a
2.5MW MCFC fuel cell. The package included a fuel reformer for low sulphur NATO
standard F-76 distillate fuel: the reformer separated the fuel into hydrogen and
carbon dioxide. The US Office of Naval Research developed a 2.5MW ship service
fuel cell which was based on a MCFC and will reform naval fuel. The goal was to
achieve their objective using commercial or near commercial technologies and for
it to be highly reliable, maintainable and self-contained with respect to water and
energy balance. The steam reformation of NATO F-76 was demonstrated for over
1,400 hours and has fuelled a sub-scale MCFC for 1,000 hours. It also demonstrated
adequate tolerance to salt, shock and vibration.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Fuel cell technology has a potential for
ship propulsion in the medium to long
term.
ii. At the present time encouraging
experience is being gained through
auxiliary, hybrid and low power
propulsion machinery.
iii. For marine propulsion, the high
temperature solid oxide and molten
carbonate fuel cells show most promise.
For lower powers, the low temperature
proton exchange membrane fuel cells
are better suited.
iv. Methanol is a possible alternative fuel.
v. Fuel cells produce a DC electrical output
and are, therefore, suited to ships with
electrical transmissions.
vi. Fuel cells have no moving parts
and consequently are quieter than
conventional machinery.
vii. If fuelled with hydrogen, they emit no
carbon dioxide from the ship.
viii.They require clean fuels and so do
not emit SOX, but also they are lowtemperature devices and emit no NOX.
3.8 Renewable energy
sources
Wind energy
Methods that use the wind to provide
energy to drive ships include a variety
of techniques. Typically these embrace
Flettner rotors, kites or spinnakers, soft
sails, wing sails and wind turbines.
Soft sails are historically the oldest of these
techniques, predating the use of mechanical
forms of propulsion. While some remarkable
sailing passages were made, particularly
in relation to the tea clippers in the 19th
and early 20th centuries, soft sail-derived
power was dependent on the availability of
the wind and relied on the skill of seamen to
make the best use of the available weather.
However, to some extent the mimicking of
these skills lends itself to automated control
systems today.
The Flettner rotor made its appearance
in the 1920s as seen in Figure 3.12.
The Flettner rotor utilises the Magnus
effect of fluid mechanics, where if wind
passes across a rotating cylinder a lift
Disadvantages
force is produced. This force has a linear
i. Although hydrogen is the easiest fuel
relationship with wind speed and, unlike
to use this would require a worldwide
conventional sails or aerofoils, a true
marine infrastructure to be developed
cross-wind relative to the ship will produce
for supply to ships: perhaps adjacent to
a useful forward thrust at any ship speed
an automotive sector.
even when this is greater than the wind
ii. The use of more conventional marine
speed. For a large ship, Flettner rotors can
fuels in fuel cells would present problems
provide a small but significant proportion of
and necessitate complex onboard prethe total propulsive power. However, the
processing to take place. They would
vorticity produced by a rotor is complex and
in this case be a significantly more
a full understanding of the mechanisms
expensive way of generating electricity
is still evolving, principally through the
than conventional methods.
means of computational fluid dynamics.
iii. Fuel cells produce DC electrical output
The vorticity in the wake of a rotor raises
and, hence, are not so suited to ships
the issue of vortex interaction if more
with mechanical transmission systems.
than one rotor is fitted to a ship. This
iv. Fuel cells have lower specific powers and
requires exploration for a particular design,
power densities than diesel engines.
particularly with respect to any interference
with the ship’s superstructure or high
freeboard under certain wind conditions.
Future ship powering options 47
Primary propulsion options
When power is
provided by wind
sources this will
tend to alter the
design basis of
the propeller.
Some allowance
of the average
power to be
derived from the
wind, therefore,
needs to be taken
into account in
the propeller
design in order
to optimise
the overall
performance of
the ship
Figure 3.15 Application of a kite to assist propulsion © Sky Sails
Figure 3.16 An image of a combination of solar and wind energy from Solar Sailor
In the case of the Baden-Baden two rotors,
18m high and 2.7m in diameter, were fitted
in place of the previously fitted three masts.
It was found that the ship could sail much
closer to the wind than when previously
under sail and in 1926 the ship made a
successful crossing of the Atlantic Ocean.
Subsequently, another 3,000-tonne cargopassenger was ordered, the Barbara, and
sailed between Hamburg and Italy for six
years. In this case the rotors differed in that
they were 17m high and 4m in diameter,
rotating at 150rpm and they were three in
number. The problem, however, remains
that if there is no wind the ship becomes
becalmed in the absence of some other
form of power: this, however, is a problem
for all types of ship where wind is a source
of power.
Solar energy
Figure 3.13 E Ship 1 © Roberto Smera
More recently, the E-Ship 1, a 10,500 dwt
vessel shown in Figure 3.13, was built in
2010. In addition to being fitted with two
3.5 MW diesel engines, E-Ship 1 has four
Flettner rotors: two aft, port and starboard,
and two forward behind the bridge and
accommodation structure. With this
arrangement the ship is capable of a
service speed of 17.5 knots.
Figure 3.14 mv Ashington wing sail application
© Mercator Media 2013
48 Royal Academy of Engineering
Apart from leisure craft, the principal usage
of sail power today is in some aspects
of the luxury cruise market or with sail
training ships. However, wing sails have
been used and a number of trials have
been undertaken in recent years. The mv
Ashington, Figure 3.14, provides an example
of wing sail application and sea trials have
shown that benefit can be obtained in the
context of an augmentation of propulsive
power. There are, however, fluctuations
in the loadings derived from the sails and
while there is a broad linearity of resultant
load when considered in the context of wind
speed, there can be significant scatter in the
results and this has to be taken into account
in the control system design. Fluctuations of
this nature require attention in the fatigue
and structural design of the installation.
© Solar Sailor 2013
Photovoltaic methods offer an approach for
limited amounts of power generation on
board ships and trials have demonstrated
that some benefit is available for auxiliary
power requirements. However, the
maximum contribution is small when
compared with the power required to drive
the ship (Mackay 2011).
In the case of wind turbines mounted on
ships for the generation of electric power,
similar considerations apply in that an
adequate differential wind speed over the
turbine rotor is required. For small ships
and leisure boats gyroscopic couples from
a wind turbine also need to be taken into
account to prevent stability issues in a
seaway.
The average raw power of sunshine is a
variable depending upon the latitude and
the angle at which the photovoltaic cell
is positioned relative to the sun. In the
United Kingdom, the average value over the
year is about 100 W/m2 on a horizontally
mounted surface. Throughout the world the
variation in power availability under average
cloud cover is typically between 87 W/m2
in Anchorage to 273 W/m2 in Nouakchott
on the coast of Mauritania. However, the
effect of cloud cover is significant in terms
of the energy that can be derived from the
sun using this technology. Consequently,
weather conditions and position on the
planet are significant influencing factors in
developing the potential of solar power.
When power is provided by wind sources
this will tend to alter the design basis of
the propeller and lead to an off-design
performance in some operating conditions.
Some allowance of the average power to
be derived from the wind, therefore, needs
to be taken into account in the propeller
design in order to optimise the overall
performance of the ship.
There is design potential to adopt a range
of rigid and flexible technologies. However,
the principal constraint is the ability to find
a large deck surface area on the ship which
does not interfere with cargo handling
or other purposes for which the ship was
designed. In this context car transporters
are an obvious candidate for the application
of this technology.
Soft sails and kites, Figure 3.15, have
been explored experimentally on modern
merchant shipping. Their contribution in the
ahead and leeway directions is a function of
the relative magnitude and direction of the
ship and wind speed.
Resulting from the laws of physics, this
technology inherently suffers from low
generation capability, even if efficiency
could be improved to 100% (MacKay 2009).
As such, coupled with a maximum attainable
specific power from the sun at given global
locations and the generally limited available
deck area suggest that the power attainable
would only be sufficient to augment the
auxiliary power demands.
Conceptual proposals have been made
to increase the available area for energy
capture from the sun by arrangements of
solar panels on mast-like structures arranged
along the deck, sometimes in combination
with wind augmentation; (Figure 3.16).
Again, the number of masts that can be
accommodated is dependent on the type
of ship and its duty as well the attitude of
the panels with respect to the sun in order
to maximise the panels’ effectiveness. It
is likely that these arrangements will only
be effective in the sense of an augment to
auxiliary power requirements.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Power derived from the wind is free from
exhaust pollutants.
ii. Partial propulsion benefits can be
achieved through wind-based methods.
iii. Solar power has been demonstrated to
augment auxiliary power.
Disadvantages
i. Wind power systems rely on the wind
strength to be effective.
ii. The use of some wind-based systems
rely upon adequate control system
technology being installed on board
the ship.
Future ship powering options 49
Primary propulsion options
Hydrogen is
a potential
alternative
fuel for ship
propulsion.
iii. Applications involving power derived
from the wind are limited to the
augmentation of propulsion unless a
full return to sail is contemplated for
specific applications.
iv. While a return to full sail propulsion
is possible, this may have a number
of adverse commercial and financial
implications in some instances in terms
of voyage times, number of ships
required, etc.
v. Solar power availability is global position
dependent.
vi. Solar energy is feasible as an augment
to auxiliary power but photovoltaic
processes are inherently of low
effectiveness, even under the best of
conditions, and require a significant
deck or structural area upon which to
place an array of cells.
3.9 Hydrogen
Hydrogen is a potential alternative fuel
for ship propulsion. It requires energy to
produce hydrogen and this could come
from either conventional fuels or nonfossil sources such as wind, hydro-electric
or nuclear. Currently, all hydrogen used in
industry is made from natural gas. In the
case of conventional sources, in order to
be effective in CO2 reduction the issue of
whether the greenhouse gas emissions
are simply being transferred from a
source on the sea to one on land has
to be adequately resolved as carbon
sequestration and storage has yet to be
demonstrated at scale.
Veldhuis (2007) assessed the application
of liquid H2 to a concept propulsion study
of a high speed container vessel designed
for high value, time-sensitive goods as an
alternative to air freight. Liquid hydrogen
benefits from a much higher specific heat
per unit weight than conventional fuels but
requires a much greater volume for storage.
If stored at 700 bar pressure the storage
tanks would be at least six times bigger than
for conventional fuels. New ship designs
50 Royal Academy of Engineering
would require increased above water
structures to accommodate this storage
capacity and, therefore, this may create
difficulties in retrofitting ships to use liquid
hydrogen fuel.
A significant advantage of liquid H2 fuel is
that it generates no CO2 or SOX emissions
to the atmosphere. NOX emissions can be
managed as for any other fuel, but where
hydrogen is burned in a fuel cell, there are
no NOX emissions. However, there are ship
safety design issues which need resolution.
These centre on the flammability of the
fuel when stored; the necessary pressure
vessels and cryogenic systems that would
be required. These issues are similar to, but
more extreme than, those already required
and which have been solved with LNG or
LPG ships.
Similarly to LNG fuelling, for liquid hydrogen
to become a realistic possibility for deep
sea ship propulsion, a liquid H2 supply
infrastructure would need to be developed.
A further utilisation of hydrogen fuels
might be in conjunction with fuel cell usage;
Section 3.8.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Liquid H2 generates no CO2, or SOX
emissions to the atmosphere originating
from the ship.
ii. Uses land-based sources of power for
creation.
iii. Hydrogen can be used in fuel cells and
internal combustion engines.
iv. Burning it produces a large feed-stock in
fresh water.
Disadvantages
i. Largely untried in the marine industry for
propulsion purposes.
ii. Hydrogen has some safety issues that
need resolution.
iii. It has a low energy density.
iv. Would need a hydrogen supply infrastructure to make it viable for the marine
industry.
3.10 Anhydrous
ammonia
3.11 Compressed air
and liquid nitrogen
Anhydrous ammonia is a dangerous,
poisonous gas, but it can be compactly
transported as a liquid in pressurised
tanks at about 30 bar or cryogenically in
unpressurised tanks. This is a bulk industrial
commodity, and can be burned in both
diesel engines and gas turbines. While it
emits no carbon dioxide at the point of use,
it cannot be considered ‘carbon-free’ unless
its manufacture (on land) does not emit
carbon dioxide, which is not currently the
case. Its calorific value is about half that of
diesel, so storage requires some adaptation
but much less than carrying hydrogen.
Compressed air and liquid nitrogen
are two further alternative sources of
energy storage for ship propulsion. Both
require energy to produce or compress
in the cases of liquid nitrogen and air
respectively. As with hydrogen the
necessary energy requirement can be
derived from conventional and non-fossil
fuels or renewable sources together
with the same caveats. Furthermore,
being energy storage media they exhibit
similar system behaviours to those of the
more conventional battery or capacitor
technologies.
The coldness of the ammonia can be used
to cool the inlet air to the prime mover to
5°C. As previously discussed in the context
of LNG, for a gas turbine this can
be particularly effective.
An assessment of the usefulness of these
storage media will depend on their system
mass for the amount of energy required
between recharge. However, inherently
these are low energy density propulsion
methods. To successfully deploy these
media it would be necessary to include
pressure vessels and, in the case of liquid
nitrogen, cryogenic systems: both well
known technologies in land-based systems.
In the case of compressed air there would
be the attendant danger of blast if a tank
for some reason ruptured. However, the
technology for protecting compressed gas
tanks from shock, in for example a collision
scenario, is well known in the container and
railway industries. Corrosion of pressurised
tanks in a marine environment may also
present a problem and suitable inspection
regimes would be essential.
The corrosion sensitivity of copper alloys to
ammonia is well known, but the sensitivity
of steels to ammonia stress corrosion
cracking can be controlled by adding a small
amount of water (0.2%) to the ammonia
(Loginow 1989).
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology
Advantages
i. No greenhouse gas emissions on board
ship.
ii. No sulphur emissions.
iii. There is mature, bulk manufacture of
130 million tonnes a year.
Disadvantages
i. Handling requires new procedures for
dangerous gases.
ii. New bunkering facilities and
infrastructure required worldwide.
iii. Some additives needed to promote
ignition in diesel engines.
iv. Made from natural gas, so always more
expensive than LNG.
v. There are some corrosion issues which
need to be overcome.
On land, compressed air energy storage is
used only in conjunction with diesel or gas
turbines: the compressed air feed means
that the pre compressor is not needed, and
therefore the prime mover can operate with
approximately 15% greater efficiency.
With compressed air storage, the
considerable amount of energy used to
compress the air is not all stored on board
the ship as the hot, compressed air is
allowed to cool to room temperature.
Future ship powering options 51
Primary propulsion options
Serial hybrid system
3 x 368kVA
Generators
400V, 50Hz, 3ph
Cos ø = 0.9
G1
ships
service
This heat energy is lost. Therefore, to obtain
substantial energy from the pure expansion
of this stored compressed air (without using
it in the compressor of a prime mover), lowgrade heat must be provided to supply the
needed energy. Sea water heat exchangers
are a possible source of this heat. The
same situation arises with liquid nitrogen:
a source of low-grade heat is required to
drive the evaporation and create a useful
pressure.
Being energy storage media they have the
advantage of generating no CO2, NOX or SOX
emissions to the atmosphere when in use
on board the ship.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. Compressed air and nitrogen generate
no CO2, NOX or SOX emissions to the
atmosphere when in use on board a ship.
ii. Uses land-based sources of non-fossil
fuel power for creation.
iii. Tank storage technologies are well
understood.
Disadvantages
i. A supply infrastructure and distribution
network would need to be developed.
ii. The size, pressure rating and cryogenic
capabilities, in the case of nitrogen, of
the ship storage tanks will determine the
amount of energy storage and hence
usefulness of the concept.
iii. There is an attendant blast risk with
high pressure tanks should fracture be
initiated.
iv. Corrosion can be a significant issue
in salt-laden environments with high
pressure tanks.
v. Largely untried in the marine industry
for propulsion purposes.
vi. These are low energy density methods
of energy storage and, therefore, are
likely to be suitable only for short sea
routes.
battery
bank
350kWh
Solid State
Generator
Figure 3.17
Propulsion plant of
the Raasay hybrid
ferry [Courtesy CMAL]
˜
DC link
375 kW
3.12 Hybrid propulsion
Hybrid propulsion is an option where one
or more modes of powering the ship can
be utilised to optimise performance for
economic, environmental or operational
reasons. Most commonly today the different
powering modes feed a common electrical
bus bar from which power can be drawn
for various purposes. This, however, need
not necessarily be the case since many
examples of mechanical linkages between
independent power sources have been
designed and operated in ships, both past
and present. Typical examples are to be
found with 10,500 dwt E-Ship which was
built in 2010, Section 3.8, and COGAG and
CODAG naval vessels. The Royal Navy’s
Type 45 destroyer’s is another typical
example where an integrated electric
propulsion system comprising two WR21
gas turbine alternators and two dieselelectric generators supply propulsion
electric induction motors at 4.16 kV.
Similarly, with the Viking Lady in its
deployment of dual-fuel generator sets
and a fuel cell; Section 3.7.
share
supply
G3
˜
˜
375 kW
0–615 RPM
The choice for a hybrid option can also
be location dependent. For example, the
new buildings to the order of CMAL for
the inter-island ferry service between
the Islands of Skye and Raasay in the
Hebrides where there is a strong desire to
preserve the environment. In this case the
propulsion system comprises diesel engines
and a system of batteries. In this case the
batteries can either be recharged from
the diesel engines or from the land-based
52 Royal Academy of Engineering
G2
variable
speed
drive
ships
service
DC link
battery
bank
350kWh
Solid State
Generator
˜
M1
M2
Prop 1
Prop 2
Emer
Swbd
375 kW
0–615 RPM
375 kW
grid when the vessel is moored in harbour
for the night. On low load sailings the ship
can also be operated by only the batteries
feeding the electric motors; (Figure 3.17).
In this case the principal reasons for
considering hybrid propulsion were:
• greater redundancy
• reduced fuel consumption
• reduced impact of CO2 emissions and
other pollutants
• uncertainty of future fuel costs
• insurance against increasing
environmental legislation
• noise reduction
• possibility to operate in zero emission
mode when the ship is in port
• lower maintenance
It is estimated that this hybrid diesel-electric
propulsion system will use at least 20% less
fuel for the ship than an equivalent dieselmechanical propulsion system operating at
design speed with the vessel fully loaded.
This fuel saving, in overall terms, relies on
the shore power component being derived
from renewable sources. There will also be
consequent reductions in CO2 emissions and
at lower speeds and light loaded conditions
greater fuel savings can be achieved. In port
the ship is capable of operating on batteries
only with zero ship-produced emissions.
Hybrid propulsion, therefore, permits
a further degree of design flexibility to
enable a ship to be configured to equitably
balance the constraints of economics and
the environment by combining different
power sources to meet the demands of the
operational profile.
Future ship powering options 53
Further propulsion considerations
4. Further propulsion
considerations
There are three
classes of
propulsor: fixed
pitch propellers;
controllable
pitch propellers
and ducted
propellers
There are other options, when fully
integrated with the prime mover
characteristics, that can enhance ship
propulsion efficiency and thereby reduce
emissions given the correct circumstances.
These include the propulsor type and
characteristics; a range of energy-saving
devices; hull form design; hull coatings and
appendage design and configuration.
4.1 Propulsors
Several propulsor types are available
for ship and marine vehicle propulsion.
The majority, however, fall into three
classes: fixed pitch propellers, which are
by far the greater proportion; controllable
pitch propellers and ducted propellers,
which normally include either a fixed or
Figure 4.1 A cruise ship’s
starboard fixed pitch
propeller
vessels. A variant of these propellers is the
CLT propeller which attempts to enhance
propulsion efficiency by the use of blade
end plates.
Irrespective of any intrinsic engine
improvements in specific fuel oil
consumption, provided there are no
restrictions on propeller diameter
introduced by the ship’s hull or base line
clearances, a large diameter, slow turning
propeller will normally give the best overall
propulsive efficiency for a particular
ship design speed. The hull’s ability to
accept such a propeller, in relation to hull
clearances and in providing good inflow
into the propeller without creating unduly
high pressure impulses on the hull from
cavitation growth and collapse on the
propeller blades, is a major determinant
when designing for efficiency. These latter
aspects have been accentuated in recent
years by increases in power transmitted
per shaft; the tendency today in many ships
to locate deckhouses at the aft end of the
hull above the propeller; the maximization
of the cargo carrying capacity, which
imposes constraints on ships’ hull lines;
ship structural failure and international
legislation.
controllable pitch propeller. The choice of
propeller type should be determined from
the ship’s operational profile and the desire
for optimisation of fuel usage together with
any special ship service requirements such
as manoeuvring, vibration reduction, noise
emissions or shallow water operation.
Fixed pitch propellers, Figure 4.1, have
traditionally formed the basis of propeller
production. This class of propellers
embraces those weighing only a few
kilograms, normally for use on small powerboats, to those destined, for example, to
propel large container ships, sometimes
weighing in excess of 130 tonnes. Design
philosophies normally focus on propeller
efficiency where the open water efficiency
ranges from around 50% for large full
form tankers and bulk carriers through to
70 or 75% for some finer hull form, faster
As propeller-specific loading increases, to
avoid the unwelcome effects of cavitation
the blade area has to increase which
frequently has the effect of reducing
propeller open water efficiency. Moreover,
in recent years there has been a growing
awareness of the effects of underwater
propeller radiated noise on marine mammals
and fish.
For some small, high-speed vessels both the
propeller advance and rotational speeds can
be high and the propeller immersion low. In
these cases it is sometimes not possible to
adequately control the effects of cavitation
acceptably within the other design
constraints and thrust breakdown or serious
blade material cavitation erosion may
result. To overcome this problem partially or
super-cavitating propellers sometimes find
application. However, with these propellers
there can be an efficiency penalty since the
blade section forms are no longer minimised
for drag but are designed to attenuate
the worst consequences of the cavitation
environment. For even more onerous
propulsion conditions surface piercing
propellers may be deployed which provide
a means of maintaining a reasonable
propulsion efficiency. This again underlines
Cavitation
The underlying physical process which produces cavitation,
at a generalised level, can be considered as an extension of
the well-known situation in which a kettle of water will boil
at a lower temperature when taken to the top of a mountain.
In the case of propeller cavitation, if the pressure over the
blade surfaces falls to a too low a level during one revolution
then cavitation will form at sea water temperature. When
the cavitation collapses, often very rapidly, at some later
point in the revolution then radiated pressures result which
may cause unacceptable ship structural vibration and noise
some distance from the ship. Moreover, if sufficient energy
transfer takes place during the cavitation collapse process
then erosion of the blade material may occur. Depending on
the energies involved this may either give rise to erosion
which fully penetrates the blade in a short time or may
simply roughen the material surface. Even in this latter case
this may be sufficient to increase the propeller blade drag.
Cavitation on a LNG
ship’s propeller
Cavitation induced
material erosion
[Courtesy J.S. Carlton]
54 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 55
Further propulsion considerations
the need for a ship engineering systems
approach to the ship design problem:
particularly in achieving the appropriate
combination of power absorption, shaft
rotational speed, ship speed and inflow to
the propeller together with adequate hull
clearances and static pressure.
Controllable pitch propellers provide,
unlike fixed pitch propellers whose only
operational variable is rotational speed, an
extra degree of freedom because in addition
to possible rotational speed changes the
blades have the ability to change blade
pitch; Figure 4.2. Nevertheless, for some
propulsion applications, particularly those
involving shaft-driven generators, it may
be desirable from an overall efficiency
point of view for the shaft speed to be held
constant and vary the power absorption by
adjusting the blade pitch: thereby, reducing
the number of propeller operating variables
to one. While this latter arrangement can be
helpful for overall energy efficiency, it may
introduce additional cavitation difficulties.
Where two or more design operating points
are required for the ship, controllable pitch
propellers may provide a better solution
in terms of efficiency by accepting some
efficiency penalty in particular operation
conditions in order to achieve a higher
Figure 4.2 Controllable
pitch propeller testing.
This photograph is
reproduced with the
permission of
Rolls-Royce plc,
overall efficiency over the entire operational
profile. Apart from providing a means of
enhancing overall efficiency in this way, the
controllable pitch propeller has advantages
in ship manoeuvring or dynamic positioning
situations. While for most seagoing ships
fixed and controllable pitch propellers
provide acceptably efficient propulsion
solutions, a further propulsor variant is the
ducted propeller.
Ducted propellers comprise two principal
components: an annular duct surrounding
a propeller which operates inside the duct.
These propulsors have found extensive
application where high thrust at low speed
is required; typically in anchor handling,
towing and trawling situations when the
duct contributes some 40 to 50% of the
propulsor’s total thrust at or near zero
ship speed. Ducts, in addition to being
fixed structures rigidly attached to the
hull as seen in the Figure, are in some
cases designed to be steerable which
then obviates the need for a rudder since
the thrust can then be vectored by the
azimuthing duct.
As an alternative to steerable ducted
propellers there are either non-ducted
or ducted azimuthing propulsors where
both propeller and duct, if fitted, are
Figure 4.3 A contrarotating propeller
system incorporating
a podded propulsor
[Courtesy ABB]
trainable about a common pod strut.
Azimuthing thrusters have been in
common use for many years for dynamic
positioning and situations where high
levels of manoeuvrability are needed. The
essential difference between azimuthing
propellers and a further variant, the
podded propulsor, is where the engine
or motor driving the propeller is sited: if
the engine or motor driving the propeller
is sited in the ship’s hull then the system is
termed an azimuthing propulsor and most
commonly the mechanical drive would be
of a Z or L type to the propeller shaft. In
the case of a podded propulsor, the drive
system comprises an electric motor directly
coupled to a propeller shaft, supported
on a system of bearings, in the pod. The
propellers associated with these latter
propulsors have been of the fixed pitch,
non-ducted type, whereas azimuthing
units have either fixed or controllable pitch
propellers. Currently, the largest size of
podded propulsor unit is around 23 MW and
their use has been mainly in the context of
cruise ships and ice breakers, where their
manoeuvring potential is fully exploited.
propeller configuration. Contra-rotating
propellers have been of considerable
theoretical and experimental interest as
well as having been the subject of some full
scale development exercises. While they
have found significant application in small
high-speed outboard units, the mechanical
problems associated with two long shafts
rotating co-axially in opposite directions
have generally precluded them from wider
use. Interest in the concept has been cyclic,
however, an upsurge in interest in 1988
resulted in a system being fitted to a 37,000
dwt bulk carrier and subsequently to a
258,000 dwt VLCC in 1993. More recently
a variant of the original contra-rotating
concept has been proposed and fitted to
some ships. This comprises the combination
of a traditional propeller, driven from a
conventional line shaft, as the forward
member of the pair with a podded propulsor
acting as the astern component: Figure 4.3.
Furthermore, such an arrangement has
the potential benefit of removing the need
for a rudder since the azimuthing podded
propulsor provides the steerage capability
for the ship.
The contra-rotating propeller principle,
comprising two coaxial propellers sited
one behind the other and rotating in
opposite directions, has the hydrodynamic
advantage of recovering part of the
slipstream rotational energy which would
otherwise be lost in a conventional single
Cycloidal propeller development started in
the 1920s, initially with the Kirsten–Boeing
and subsequently the Voith–Schneider
designs. They comprise a set of vertically
mounted vanes, six or eight in number,
which rotate on a disc mounted in a
horizontal or near horizontal plane. The
© Rolls-Royce plc 2013
56 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 57
Further propulsion considerations
Figure 4.4 Typical fast
ferry application of
waterjet propulsion
vanes are constrained to move about their
spindle axis relative to the rotating disc in a
predetermined way by a governing linkage.
While having comparatively low efficiency,
vertical axis propellers have significant
advantages when manoeuvrability or
station keeping is a high ship operational
priority since the resultant thrust can
be varied and readily directed along any
navigational bearing.
Waterjet propulsion has found application
on a variety of small high-speed craft and
ferries while its application to larger craft is
growing with tunnel diameters of upwards
of 2 m. Waterjets, Figure 4.4, potentially
offer a relatively efficient solution in difficult
hydrodynamic situations for conventional
propellers together with very good
manoeuvrability.
Magnetohydrodynamic propulsion
can provide a means of ship propulsion
without the need for propellers or paddles.
It is based on the Lorentz force equation
derived in the 19th century. The idea
of electromagnetic thrusters was first
patented in the USA in 1961 (Rice 1961). In
the early 1990’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
built the MHD powered demonstration ship
58 Royal Academy of Engineering
Yamato 1. This 150-tonne craft used liquid
helium-cooled superconducting magnets to
achieve the required high magnetic fields;
however, the achieved speed was around
8 knots.
An anticipated benefit of MHD drives
was that they were expected to be near
silent in operation and hence became of
considerable interest to the submarine
community. However, in practice this
proved not to be the case. The production
of bubbles at the electrodes creates
broadband noise emissions that span a
frequency range from 2kHz to 20 kHz and
beyond, but with most of the energy in the
range 2kHz to 6kHz. This noise is created
principally through coalescence of bubbles
having diameters between 0.075mm
and 0.15mm which become spherical as
they move away from the walls of the
duct and hence become effective omnidirectional acoustic sources. Although MHD
principles have been used successfully in
electromagnetic rail guns and in liquid metal
pumps, they have proved less successful for
marine propulsion.
Future ship powering options 59
Further propulsion considerations
4.2 Energy-saving
devices
Energy-saving devices based on
hydrodynamic interaction can be considered
as operating in three basic zones of the hull:
before the propeller; at the propeller station
and after the propeller. However, some
devices overlap these somewhat artificial
boundaries. Those acting just ahead of
the propeller are interacting with the final
stages of the ship’s boundary layer growth.
This is to gain some direct flow-related
benefit or present the propeller with a
more advantageous flow regime in which
to operate: in some cases both. Devices at
the propeller station and downstream are
operating within both the hull wake field
and its modification by the slipstream of the
propeller. In this way they are attempting
to recover energy which would otherwise
be lost.
Table 4.1 includes some of the more
common flow augmentation devices
most of which aim to achieve propulsive
efficiency enhancements in specific ship
applications. The devices are directed
towards different ship types and flow
configurations and have some merit
in their particular areas of application.
However, due to the complexities of the
flow in the ship’s afterbody region, many
require a combination of model testing,
computational fluid dynamic and classical
analysis to optimize their performance. It
has to be realised that if some devices are
used outside of their intended fields of
application, disappointing results can occur.
As such, care in application is essential.
It is also pertinent to consider whether
the various energy-saving devices are
compatible with each other so as to enable a
cumulative benefit to be gained from fitting
several devices to a ship. In general this is
not the case because some devices remove
or alter the flow regimes upon which others
depend. However, if devices depend on
different regions of the flow field around
the ship and are mutually independent,
it can be possible to deploy them in
combination in order to gain an enhanced
benefit.
MagnEtohydrodynamic Propulsion
The Lorentz force equation can be written as
F = e[ J + (v x B)]
where J, B and v are vectors defining, respectively, electric and magnetic fields and the velocity v of
the charge carriers. It states that a force F is experienced by a charge of magnitude e equal to the
vector sum of that due to the electric field, eJ, and that due to the motion of the charge through any
additional magnetic field, e(v x B). Here v x B is the vector cross product of v and B and creates a
force vector normal to the plane containing vectors v and B. In its simplest configuration, the electric
and magnetic fields are arranged orthogonal to each other with the normal to their plane pointing in
the direction of the desired thrust. The electric field J leads to the transport of charge across the duct
and hence creates the velocity field v necessary to produce the axial thrust from the cross product of
v and B.
Internal duct flow
Induced current
density J
Lofantz force
JxB
Water flow
Magnetic field B
Magneto-hydrodynamic operation principle
Energy saving and flow conditioning deviceOperation
Wake equalizing duct
Asymmetric stern
Grothuis spoilers
Semi or partial stern tunnels
Mewis ducts
Devices which operated on the flow
before the propeller.
Reaction fins
Mitsui integrated ducted propellers
Hitachi Zozen nozzle
Increased diameter/low rpm propellers
Propellers with end plates
Keppel propellers
Operation at the propeller
Propeller boss cap fins
Grim vane wheels
Table 4.1 Energy saving
and flow conditioning
devices [Carlton, 2012]
60 Royal Academy of Engineering
Additional rudder thrusting fins
Rudder bulb fins
Devices operating just behind or at the
propeller
The thrust of an MHD drive is proportional to sB2 where s is the conductivity of the liquid being
pumped; in the case of a ship this being sea water. The necessary magnetic fields can be large even
by modern standards. For torpedoes with a high top speed it may be necessary to create fields in
the range 15T to 20T, however, for ships and submarines at typical speeds the magnetic field can be
lower, around 5T to 10T. This, however, raises serious concerns around magnetic stealth in relation
to warships.
The electric field has certain detrimental consequences. Unlike fresh water, in which hydrogen
appears at the cathode and oxygen at the anode, in seawater trace elements which typically are
ions of sodium, chlorine, magnesium, sulphur, potassium and calcium give rise, in addition to oxygen,
to the production of other chemical species and to chlorine gas at the anode. The high pH at the
cathode leads to scale production, typically of calcium hydroxide or magnesium hydroxide, which are
electrically insulating. Consequently, over a period of a few days the current can reduce by 12% and
with it the effectiveness of the drive. Where copper or aluminium anodes have been used, these can
be severely corroded as CuO2, AlO2, or their chlorides are produced and hence careful selection of
electrode material is necessary. The electrolysis process produces gases at the electrodes and these
have the effect of blanketing the electrodes and hence the cathode is best placed at the bottom of
the duct to encourage hydrogen to rise into the induced flow and be swept out of the duct.
Future ship powering options 61
Further propulsion considerations
Within the Ship
design process
it is important
to consider
alternative
design solutions
and not simply
follow accepted
wisdom
4.3 Hull design and
appendages
A ship’s propulsive efficiency comprises
three components: propulsor open water
efficiency, hull efficiency and the relative
rotative efficiency. The latter component
is small since it is the ratio of the torque
absorbed by a propeller in open water
to that when working in the wake field
behind the ship. In general, the first two
components are dominant and propeller
open water efficiency is generally
considered in Section 4.1.
The hull efficiency is governed by the hull
form and its principal dimensions. These
are subject to a number of constraints in
addition to those imposed by the principles
of ship hydrodynamics. For example, ship
length may be a commercial function
of nominal berth length; hull draught
restrictions due to port water depths;
breadth by safe navigation in channels or
through locks and in the case of container
ships, the outreach of the dockside cranes.
Additionally, there may be constraints
imposed by the building dock. These and
other similar factors have to be recognised
but, nevertheless, challenged for validity
in an attempt to achieve the most
hydrodynamically efficient hull form. If this
design optimisation is not done effectively
the ship will inevitably carry an efficiency
penalty by not being correctly optimised.
Once valid design constraints have been
established the hull form can be effectively
designed: a process which is based on the
Table 4.2 Comparative
importance of frictional
resistance with respect
to ship type
62 Royal Academy of Engineering
necessary compromises that have to be
made between resistance and propulsion,
stability, seakeeping and manoeuvrability
in order to meet the desired operational
profile. During this process, it is essential to
recognise that the propulsor has to operate
within the flow field generated by the hull
and by not taking due recognition of this,
hull design decisions may be taken which
ultimately inhibit the propulsor design from
attaining the best efficiency. This underlines
the need for a holistic systems approach to
ship hydrodynamic design.
Within the design process it is important
to consider alternative design solutions
and not simply follow ‘accepted wisdom’.
An example of this is to be found in
recent research into tanker design where
convention might dictate a hull block
coefficient in the region of 0.82 for a 250m
long ship. However, model tests have
suggested that a solution which relaxes the
length constraint slightly and in conjunction
with a block coefficient of 0.63 enhances
the performance in both the ballast and
loaded conditions with estimated potential
fuel savings of around 8.8 tonnes/day.
4.4 Hull coatings
Hull coatings and roughness play an
important part in the minimisation of the
skin friction component of resistance. This
is a significant component of the total
resistance as seen from Table 4.2 (Carlton
2012). Hull surface roughness comprises the
sum of two elements; permanent roughness
Ship type
Frictional to total resistance ratio
ULCC 516893 dwt (loaded)
0.85
Crude oil tanker 140803 dwt (loaded)
0.78
(ballast)
0.63
Products tanker 50801 dwt (loaded)
0.67
Container ship 37000 dwt
0.62
Cruise ship
0.66
Ro/Ro ferry
0.55
and temporary roughness. The former
refers to the amount of unevenness and
condition of the hull plating in terms of the
bowing of the ship’s plates, weld seams and
the condition of the steel surface, while the
latter principally accounts for fouling and
deposits that build up on the hull surface.
Fouling commences with slime, comprising
bacteria and diatoms, which then
progresses to algae and in turn on to animal
foulers such as barnacles, culminating in
the climax community. In this cycle (Christie
1981) the colonization by marine bacteria
on a non-toxic surface is immediate, their
numbers reaching several hundred in a few
minutes, several thousand within a few
hours and several millions within two to
three days. Diatoms tend to appear within
the first two or three days and then grow
rapidly, reaching peak numbers within the
first fortnight. Depending on the prevailing
local conditions, this early diatom growth
may be overtaken by fouling algae. The
mixture of bacteria, diatoms and algae in
this early stage of surface colonization is
recognized as the primary slime film. The
fouling community which will eventually
establish itself on the surface is known as
the climax community and is particularly
dependent on the localized environment.
In conditions of good illumination this
community may be dominated by green
algae, barnacles or mussels.
The tin-based marine coatings, particularly
tributyltin (TBT), were excellent in
keeping underwater hull surfaces free
of fouling and, in so doing, reducing
fuel consumption. However, they
were exceedingly detrimental to the
environment and were eventually banned
in 2008 following discussion at IMO MEPC.
Currently a number of alternative marine
paints have come on to the market such
as copper-based and synthetic biocide
paints; nevertheless, further work is
proceeding to find alternatives. Siliconbased paints have also been marketed
and, while relatively expensive, can be
effective in preventing fouling when used
in the correct circumstances. Many of
these products are under evaluation by
shipowners to see how well they satisfy
their particular needs: among other
factors, these relate to application cost,
durability and effectiveness in minimising
fuel consumption within the operational
spectrum.
Research work is progressing to find
ecologically friendly alternatives. One such
method is based around electrochemically
active coating systems. This concept
produces regularly changing pH values
on the surface of the hull and thereby
effectively prevents fouling colonization
without having to use biocides (Fraunhofer
2012). Initial tests have been promising in
proving product stability and efficiency in
preventing bio-fouling.
Research has been undertaken over many
years to endeavour to minimise frictional
drag. Methods involving the injection of
small quantities of long-chain polymers into
the turbulent boundary layer surrounding
the hull, such as polyethylene oxide,
were shown in the 1960s to significantly
reduce resistance, provided the molecular
weight and concentration were chosen
correctly. Those methods which relied on
the injection of chemical substances into
the sea along the hull surface are unlikely
to be environmentally acceptable today.
Nevertheless, current research is focusing
on a range of methods involving boundary
layer fluid injection and manipulation.
These typically embrace the injection of
low-pressure air either to develop a microbubble interface between the hull and the
sea water or through the provision of an air
cushion trapped by an especially developed
hull form. Further research is exploring the
frictional resistance benefits obtainable
from the texture of hull coatings and in
some cases endeavouring to emulate the
skin of marine mammals and fish.
Future ship powering options 63
Further propulsion considerations
High temperature
superconductors
were discovered
in 1986, but their
production
as useful
conductors is
still not fully
industrialised
4.5 Superconducting
electric motors
Although large conventional electric
motors are efficient, superconducting
motors can be more efficient, around 99%
– especially when running at less than
their maximum speed. This improvement
can lead to savings in fuel and gaseous
emissions. Moreover, superconducting
motors are smaller and more power-dense
than conventional motors of similar power;
typically around 30 kW/kg compared
to about 5 kW/kg for a conventional
motor. Additionally, high-temperature
superconducting motors have signature
benefits that are attractive in naval service.
In January 2009, the American
Superconductor Corporation (AMSC),
together with the Northrop Grumman
Corporation, announced the successful
completion of the full-power land-based
testing of a 36.5 MW high temperature
superconductor ship propulsion motor,
(Figure 4.5). However, there are currently
no superconducting motors in use on ships.
All superconductors are characterised by three parameters: a critical temperature; a critical magnetic
field strength; and a critical current density. If any of these are transiently exceeded the material will
suddenly return to the normal non-superconducting state and possibly serious damage can occur.
Critical currents and fields depend upon temperature and both, in general, decrease smoothly to zero
as temperature increases to the critical temperature, as shown in the Figure.
Some potential advantages and
disadvantages of the technology:
Advantages
i. The technology has been shown to be
viable in large demonstrator applications.
ii. Losses in the electrical machine are low
resulting in a more efficient motor.
iii. Exhaust emissions can be lower.
v. The size and weight of the electrical
machine is lower.
Jc (A/m2)
1011
Niobium-titanium alloy
Nb3Sn
109
108
10
5
20
m
liu
d
ui
o
dr
hy
T(K)
10
he
25
20
15
Nb3Ge
Liq
30
40
PbMo6S8
50
60
µoHc2(T)
n
ge
Disadvantages
i. A cryogenic cooling system has to be
provided for the current and expected
future generations of machines and
continued operation of the motor will
be dependent on the reliability of the
cooling system.
ii. The technology has yet to be proven at
sea.
Despite being discovered over 100 years
ago, superconductivity remains an
active area of fundamental research
64 Royal Academy of Engineering
In 1933, Meissner and Ochsenfeld reported that magnetic fields are expelled from superconductors.
The appearance of a critical temperature and the Meissner effect are taken as the defining evidence
that a substance is in a superconducting state.
d
ui
Photo courtesy of AMSC
The discovery of superconductivity, in 1911, is credited to Heike Kamerlingh-Onnes. He spent his
career exploring extremely cold refrigeration techniques and, in 1908, was the first to liquefy helium
which he used to study platinum and gold at very low temperatures – but without detecting what
would become known as superconductivity. He then turned to mercury and at about 4.2°K the
resistance of his mercury sample dropped from 0.11Ω to less than 10-5Ω. This sudden and significant
drop in resistance is a signature of superconductivity and the temperature at which it occurs is the
critical temperature. Shortly afterwards superconductivity was also discovered in tin and lead and in
1913 Onnes was awarded the Nobel Prize for the discovery of superconductivity.
Liq
Figure 4.5 Superconductor motors and generators
are significantly smaller and lighter than conventional
rotating machines. This photo shows a 36.5
megawatt superconductor ship propulsion motor that
was designed and manufactured by AMSC for the U.S.
Navy. This machine, which successfully passed landbased testing, was less than half the size and weight
of a conventional motor of the same power rating.
High-temperature superconductors were
discovered in 1986, but their production
as useful conductors is still not fully
industrialised: they are expensive and
difficult to make and require particular
grain alignments. Although a new simpler
superconductor material, magnesium
diboride, was discovered in 2001, its lower
critical temperature and sensitivity to
magnetic fields mean that its applicability
to rotating machinery is still a matter of
research.
Despite being discovered over 100
years ago, superconductivity remains
an active area of fundamental research.
However, it is not unreasonable to expect
that superconducting motors operating
at commercially accessible cryogenic
temperatures, and constructed using an
affordable wire, will become available
in the next decade or two. However, it
takes a significant time for a totally new
superconducting material to become
available as a useful engineering wire,
and most superconducting materials are
inherently unsuitable for this engineering
application. The design of superconducting
rotating machinery is itself also an active
research area, so commercial availability
of this technology must be viewed in the
medium to long term.
Typical current, field and temperature dependencies of superconductivity.
High temperature superconductivity was first reported in a paper published in April 1986. This
paper by Bednorz and Muller described an insulating barium-lanthanum-copper-oxygen ceramic
compound with a previously unheard-of critical temperature of 30°K. In less than a year of their
publication a second compound, this time of yttrium-barium-copper-oxygen (YBCO), was identified
with a transition temperature of ~96°K. In 1987, Bednorz and Alexander received the Nobel Prize
for their work and an urgent search started for additional high-temperature superconductors. At
the present time, many high-temperature superconductors with critical temperatures above 96°K
have been identified, and many more completely new classes of superconducting materials have
been discovered. Nevertheless, the current front-runner for most engineering applications involving
magnetic fields is YBCO, discovered in 1987, but it has taken more than 20 years to develop effective
engineering conductors using it. One difficulty is that the grain alignment required means that the
conductors are flat tapes, not round wires, which makes winding coils more complicated and limits
the design of coils and hence the machines that can be built using them.
Future ship powering options 65
Further propulsion considerations
4.6 Ship operational
considerations
4.6.1 Operational profile
The intended operational profile of a ship, in
terms of the proportion of time likely to be
spent at particular speeds, is a fundamental
parameter in forming the design basis of a
ship and its propulsion machinery. From the
operational profile the choice of machinery
type and arrangement will be made as well
as the propeller type and its design point(s).
These parameters, together with the hull
form, are fundamental to the determination
of the basic overall efficiency of the ship.
in the presence
of adverse
weather, the
shortest route
is not always the
fastest or the
most economic
66 Royal Academy of Engineering
4.6.2 Weather routing
The underlying purpose of weather routing
is to establish the optimum track for long
distance voyages, since, in the presence of
adverse weather, the shortest route is not
always the fastest or the most economic.
This is because, notwithstanding the
potential for causing damage (Section 2.3),
maintaining speed in storms or poor
weather causes added resistance due to
the wind and waves, the magnitude of
which is dependent on the severity and
direction of the weather relative to the
ship. This increases fuel consumption.
Alternatively, if speed is reduced through
adverse conditions, estimated times of
arrival can be extended with consequent
implications for docking slot availability.
The principal idea, therefore, is to use
updated weather forecast data and choose
an optimal route through calmer sea areas
or areas that have the most downwind
tracks based on predictive and optimisation
methodologies. Such approaches rely
on a knowledge of the ship’s calm water
resistance and added resistance in waves.
These systems have been deployed in
various forms of complexity over the last
thirty or so years to good effect. However,
the increasing sophistication of weather
forecasting over that period has permitted a
continuing enhancement of the technique.
The more advanced systems take into
account the ocean currents, wave and
swell composition and wind speeds in their
optimisation of the voyage parameters.
The resulting track information can then be
imported to the ship’s navigation system. In
this way, on board monitoring and decision
support systems can be deployed and an
energy-efficient approach to ship operation
implemented. Indeed, when arrival times
are critical these approaches to voyage
planning help to mitigate the effects of
the approach common some years ago
of steaming at full speed on departure
for a day or so ‘to get some time in hand’
against any adverse conditions that might
subsequently be encountered during the
voyage. Recognising the approximately
cubic relationship of power with ship speed,
this is seen as a very expensive practice,
both economically and environmentally.
4.6.3 Plant operational practices
The condition of the ship’s machinery has
an important influence on the economic
performance of the ship. Condition
monitoring, performance measurement
and maintenance practices are therefore
a critical component in keeping the
plant in optimal condition. Furthermore,
unmotivated crews, for whatever reason,
are unlikely to maintain a ship at its peak
performance. Alternatively, a poorly
designed machinery space with limited
access problems to components can
also be a disincentive to conduct proper
maintenance activities.
Notwithstanding the influence of poor
weather on fuel consumption, in a recent
study centred on a ferry sailing between
Stockholm and Helsinki some 7% less fuel
consumption was achieved by optimising
the ship’s speed during the passage in
conjunction with crew training. These
savings were achieved using real-time
decision support systems to advise the
crew about ship operation, route planning
and navigation with the goal of optimising
energy use and maintaining emissions to
a minimum level. These types of capability
have been under development since
the mid-1970s, and with progressive
increases in instrumentation and predictive
capabilities have become increasingly more
powerful. There is nevertheless still scope
for the development of these methods.
In addition to decision support methods,
there is the ability to sail the ship at slower
speeds with the attendant advantage of
reductions in fuel consumed. This carries
the implication of longer voyage times as
well as for the accountancy notion of the
cost of goods in transit, but in addition
to the fuel savings it also has beneficial
environmental consequences. Slower ship
speeds can be prescribed for the initial
design or as an imposition on an already
faster design of ship, given that the main
engine’s slow running constraints are
satisfied. In this latter case the propeller
may also be modified or redesigned to
further enhance the propulsive efficiency
of the ship because of the lower specific
thrust loading: Section 4.1. The dangers of
under-powering a ship, discussed in Section
2, must also be recognised if potentially
hazardous situations are to be avoided.
Future ship powering options 67
Time frame for technical development
5. Time frame for
technical development
A range of ship propulsion options have
been considered. While some are applicable
in the short term, others are medium- and
long-term options, due to the necessary
technical, commercial and political
developments. Some are unlikely to come
to fruition within a reasonable timescale.
perspectives within the marine and related
industries. The actual progress will be
dependent on the pace of technological
development, commercial motivation,
public perception and political acceptability.
Appendix 10 considers the applicability of
the various options discussed in this report
to a range of ship types. Within these ship
types, both new and existing ships are
considered as well as operational practice.
Figure 5.1 develops a perspective on the
likely progress towards maturity of the
propulsion methodologies as seen currently
from the technical and research funding
Short term
Medium termLong term
Diesel engine
EGR & SCR systems
Based on
reciprocating
engine
technologies
Humidification & water injection
Duel fuel engines
LNG fuel
Di-methyl ether
Demonstrators
Second and third generation biofuels
Hydrogen
H2 infrastructure
Gas turbines
Hybrid propulsion
Renewable sources for power augmentation
Other propulsion
technologies
Fuel cells for auxiliary power
Demonstrators
Superconducting electric motors
Fuel cells for main propulsion
H2 infrastructure
Nuclear propulsion
Energy storage
breakthrough
Battery main propulsion
Conventional propulsors
Figure 5.1 Potential
phasing of different
propulsion technologies
in time
68 Royal Academy of Engineering
Hydrodynamic
enhancements
Waterjet propulsion
New hull forms & energy saving devices
New hull coatings
MHD propulsion
Future ship powering options 69
Conclusions
6. Conclusions
The condition
of a ship’s
machinery has
a significant
influence
on fuel
consumption
and emissions
performance
It is evident that to optimise the potential
benefits of a propulsion option, or
combination of options, in terms of
efficiency and minimising the impact
on the environment, an integrated ship
design procedure based on a systems
engineering approach must be employed.
Fundamental to this process is the proper
definition of the intended ship’s operational
profile and the perceived tolerance on this
profile to meet future market fluctuations.
When this profile is combined with the
anticipated future daily fluctuations in
the ship operating and fuel costs, a design
space can be defined within which the ship
system can be contemplated. Furthermore,
anticipated changes in environmental or
legal frameworks should be introduced into
this design space definition.
Within a ship system design approach,
consideration must be given to the
integration of the various subsystems
and their relative influences upon each
other. This should include the prime
mover or fundamental power source; fuel
characteristics; the hull form together with
the challenging of any constraints imposed
upon it; the propulsor type and the creation
of conditions to achieve the maximum
efficiency possible; the minimisation of
appendage resistance and the inclusion of
other appropriate energy-saving devices.
Furthermore, hull coatings are an essential
engineering consideration in achieving
optimal powering, since for many ships
the frictional resistance is a significant
proportion of the total ship resistance.
70 Royal Academy of Engineering
With regard to ship operation, it has been
demonstrated that weather routing of ships
between ports to avoid poor weather and
storms, with the consequent influence on a
ship’s added resistance, has important fuel
consumption benefits. Similar benefits are
also realisable when ship speed is optimised
during voyages as well as investing in
appropriate crew training so they fully
understand the implications of actions they
may take. In this context, real-time decision
support systems with the goal of optimising
energy use and minimising emissions are
helpful in achieving these fuel savings.
There is the ability to invoke slower ship
speeds since this will result in reductions
in fuel consumed and have beneficial
environmental consequences. These
slower speeds can be prescribed for the
initial design or as an imposition on an
already faster design of ship; given that the
limitations arising from the main engine’s
slow steaming constraints are satisfied.
In this latter case further performance
benefits can gained from redesigning or
modifying the propeller to accommodate
the resulting lower specific thrust loading.
Notwithstanding any benefits derived from
slow steaming, there is an operational risk
in fitting ships with too small engines, to
meet environmental design indices or other
criteria, as the ships may have insufficient
power to navigate safely in poor weather.
The condition of a ship’s machinery has a
significant influence on fuel consumption
and emissions performance. There is
therefore good reason to keep machinery
well-maintained, particularly in view of
the increasing levels of complexity. In this
respect, demotivated crews, for whatever
reason, are unlikely to maintain the ship at
its peak performance: conversely, a poorly
designed machinery space which has
accessibility problems will militate against
proper maintenance activities, however
well the crew are motivated.
The hull and machinery insurance impact
of most of the systems considered in
this report, with the exception of nuclear
propulsion, is likely to be relatively
low. Indeed, they are unlikely to merit
specific consideration beyond insurers
understanding any new technology and
the costs associated with repairs. A caveat
to that, however, could be the market’s
previous experience with new systems
which may encourage underwriters to
impose higher policy deductibles or self
insured retentions. Cover might be modified,
or the insured forced to run a higher
self-insured retention, in cases of truly
prototypical technology. This is because the
fear of costly repairs and the prototypical
nature of a system may prompt hull and
machinery underwriters to restrict cover in
some way and to charge higher premiums to
reflect any new technology. Nevertheless,
the transfer of a land-based technology
together with that experience to a marine
environment may help in that respect.
The adoption of alternative propulsion
options will be dependent on the price
of fuels, the impact of present and
future environmental legislation and the
likelihood of carbon tax introduction. In the
case of fuel price, recent experience has
demonstrated a trend towards increase
superimposed with strong fluctuations.
However, there is debate whether the
presently observed trends will be carried
forward into the future. Set against this
background the propulsion options in the
short-, medium- and long-term time frames
can be considered.
Short-term options:
In the short term, the diesel engine is
currently the most widespread marine prime
mover for ship propulsion. Moreover, diesel
engine technology is a well-understood
and reliable form of propulsion and auxiliary
power generation technology and engine
manufacturers have well-established
repair and spare part networks around
the world. There is also a supply of trained
engineers and their training requirements
are well known and established facilities
exist for the appropriate levels of training.
In the immediate future methods for
reducing emission levels exist and there
are continuing programmes of research
and development being undertaken by
the engine builders. At present engine
builders are generally confident of meeting
MARPOL Annex VI Tier 3 requirements by
combinations of primary and secondary
methods. Furthermore, all grades of fuel
have a worldwide distribution network and
are readily obtainable. However, there is
now some contamination of the marine fuel
supply by first-generation biofuels and this
needs to be carefully managed on board
ships. Nevertheless, diesel engines produce
CO2 emissions as well as NOX and SOX,
volatile organic compounds and particulate
matter, albeit through reduction measures
in reduced quantities. It should, however, be
noted that the quantity of SOX produced is
a direct function of the amount of sulphur
present in the fuel burnt.
Natural gas is a fuel that can be used in
reciprocating engines and is a known
technology. Service experience with
dual-fuel and converted diesel engines,
albeit limited at the present time, has
been satisfactory. Indeed, it is relatively
easy to convert many existing marine
engines to burn LNG and currently this
fuel is considerably cheaper than the
conventional fuels. LNG fuel, while not
free of harmful emissions, has benefits in
terms of CO2, NOX and SOX emissions given
that methane slip is avoided during the
bunkering and combustion processes. In
the worldwide context, there is a general
lack of a bunkering infrastructure at
Future ship powering options 71
Conclusions
Gas turbines have
successfully
been used in niche
areas of the
marine market
and represent
a proven high
power density
propulsion
technology
present, although LNG has been used to
good effect in certain short sea and coastal
trades. Additionally, there are now moves
to establish larger bunkering facilities at
major international ports and some large
commercial ships are currently in service or
on order to utilise LNG fuel.
Gas turbines have successfully been used
in niche areas of the marine market and
represent a proven high power density
propulsion technology. In particular, their
low weight gives considerable flexibility
when locating them in a ship in the context
of turbo-electric designs. However, the
high distillate grades of fuel for aeroderivative gas turbines are expensive
when compared to conventional marine
fuels and their thermal efficiencies are
lower than for slow speed diesel engines
of similar power. These can be enhanced,
however, in combined cycle installations
where the exhaust heat is used to develop
additional power.
Renewable energy sources are free from
exhaust pollutants. However, wind-based
solutions tend to be limited to propulsion
augmentation roles unless a full return to
sail is contemplated in specific applications.
Wind power systems rely on the wind
strength to be effective and the use
of some systems are dependant upon
adequate control system technology being
installed on board the ship. Solar energy is
feasible as a source of auxiliary power but
photovoltaic processes inherently have
low effectiveness and require a significant
deck area upon which to place an array of
cells. Although solar-derived power is
global position and weather dependent,
it has been demonstrated to augment
auxiliary power.
Medium- to long-term options
Biofuels are a potential medium-term
alternative to conventional fuels for diesel
engines, although with the first generation
of biofuels, biodiesel and bioethanol, some
issues have been experienced when used
in marine engines. For the future, synthetic
fuels based on branch-chain higher alcohols
and new types of microorganisms and algae
are a medium- to long-term possibilities
given that production volumes can satisfy
the demand from the marine and other
markets. It will, however, be necessary
to examine in greater detail aspects of
the storage, fuel handling, and impacts
on health, safety and the environment.
Di-methyl ether also shows potential as an
alternative fuel, but at present there are
disadvantages which require resolution in
terms of lubricity and corrosion together
with creating a sufficient production and
supply capability.
Fuel cells offer potential for ship propulsion,
and at the present time, encouraging
experience has been acquired with auxiliary
and low-power propulsion machinery. For
marine propulsion, the high-temperature
solid oxide and molten carbonate fuel cells
show most promise, while for lower powers
the low-temperature proton exchange
membrane fuel cells are more suited.
Hydrogen is the easiest fuel to use in fuel
cells but this would require a worldwide
infrastructure to be developed for supply to
ships. Methanol is a possible alternative, but
the use of more conventional marine fuels
would present problems and necessitate
complex onboard pre-processing to take
place. Since fuel cells produce a DC electrical
output, they would be better suited for
ships with hybrid or full electric systems.
The propulsion of ships by nuclear power
has the advantage during operation of
producing no CO2, NOX and SOX, volatile
organic and particulate emissions.
Additionally, the cost of uranium has
been relatively cheap in comparison to
conventional marine fuels and the refuelling
72 Royal Academy of Engineering
Batteries, by
virtue of the
rapidly developing
technology
surrounding them,
offer a potential
solution for
ship propulsion.
Full battery
propulsion must,
however, await
further technical
development,
and even then
it is likely to be
confined to the
small ship market
of nuclear reactors with ready-made
elements would be accomplished under
term contracts rather than on-the-spot
market. Furthermore, a significant body
of experience exits in the design and safe
operation of shipboard nuclear propulsion
plant: particularly in the case of PWR
designs. The conventional methods of
design, planning, building and operation
of merchant ships would, however, need
complete overhaul, since for a nuclear
propelled ship the process would be driven
by a safety case and systems engineering
approach. There would, however, be a
number of constraints imposed on ship
design and operation as well as on the
deployment of this technology, all of
which would need resolution. These
include international nuclear regulation;
design execution and planning, operation,
training and retention of crews and
shore staff, security, public perception,
disposal; financing the initial capital cost;
the setting up and the maintenance of an
infrastructure support system. Insurance
is a serious issue for nuclear merchant
ships, and while the insurance industry is a
service industry, this would need resolution
as governments are unlikely to enter this
market as they do for naval ships. Within the
discussion it has been seen that the concept
of small modular marinised reactor plants or
molten salt reactors may attenuate many
of these difficulties although not dispose of
them. As such, it would be prudent to keep a
watching brief on the development of these
technologies with a view to implementation
in the medium to long term.
With regard to hydrogen, compressed air
and liquid nitrogen, these are likely to be
long-term propulsion options. While the
latter two options are energy storage
media, hydrogen is a fuel which generates
no CO2 or SOX emissions to the atmosphere
and could use land-based renewable
sources of power for its creation. Hydrogen
has a number of safety issues associated
with it and has a low energy density but is
ideal for use in fuel cells or could be burnt
in suitably modified reciprocating engines.
To be viable as a marine fuel, it would need
a supply infrastructure, and at present it
is largely untried in the marine industry
for propulsion purposes. Clearly, should a
hydrogen economy evolve at some time in
the future then it would be a marine fuel
option.
Superconducting electric motor technology
has been shown to be viable in land-based
demonstrator applications up to 35MW, and
since the electrical losses are low, result
in a more efficient motor. Depending upon
the type of prime mover deployed, exhaust
emissions will therefore be lower and if
a coolant failure occurs, the machine can
run for some time after the failure. Some
advantage might also accrue from the
smaller physical size of the electric machine.
In the case of compressed air and liquid
nitrogen they would, again, use land-based
sources of power for creation and the tank
storage technologies are well understood.
Nevertheless, the size, pressure rating and
cryogenic capabilities, in the case of liquid
nitrogen, of the ship storage tanks would
determine the amount of energy storage
and hence usefulness of the concept.
Moreover, there is an attendant blast risk
with high-pressure gas tanks should
Batteries, by virtue of the rapidly developing
technology surrounding them, offer a
potential solution for ship propulsion. Full
battery propulsion must, however, await
further technical development, and even
then it is likely to be confined to the small
ship market. At present the size of the
necessary battery pack would preclude their
use as the sole means of propulsion in all
but the smallest of ships undertaking short
sea voyages. Nevertheless, battery-based
propulsion would be beneficial from the CO2,
NOX, SOX, volatile organic and particulate
emissions points of view since none occur
during operation. Batteries in conjunction
with other modes of propulsion may offer a
potential hybrid solution for the propulsion
of small- to medium-sized ships.
Future ship powering options 73
Conclusions
If, in the future,
a hydrogen
economy is
adopteD, then
hydrogen may
become an
alternative
marine fuel
option
fracture initiate and, moreover, corrosion
can be an issue in salt-laden environments
with high-pressure tanks. As with hydrogen,
a supply infrastructure and distribution
network would need to be developed,
recognising that air is part of the natural
environment whereas nitrogen has to
be made.
Magnetohydrodynamic propulsion is not
seen as being viable in anything but the long
term for merchant ships.
In the context of the current and future
merchant marine fleets it is considered that:
i. For existing ships reciprocating
engines with exhaust gas attenuation
technologies are the principal option
together with, if so desired, fuels having
less CO2 emission potential. LNG is
one such fuel and together with some
other future alternatives requires an
adequate bunkering infrastructure to
be developed, particularly, for deep sea
voyages.
iii. In the case of ships contemplated for the
medium to long term, further propulsion
options will present themselves including
fuel cells, batteries and nuclear. The
former methods await technological
development but nuclear, while wellunderstood technically, would require
a major change to ship building,
owning and operation infrastructure
and practices together with a suitable
international regulatory structure.
Renewable sources such as wind and solar
are augments to power requirements,
assuming a return to full sail propulsion
is not contemplated. If, in the future,
a hydrogen economy is adopted, then
hydrogen may become an alternative
marine fuel option.
Underpinning these possible alternatives
is a need for further soundly based
techno-economic studies on target
emissions from ships.
ii. For presently contemplated
newbuildings the scenario is broadly
similar but with the option to include
hybrid propulsion systems depending on
the ship size and its intended duty cycle.
74 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 75
Glossary of terms
References
Andriotis et al. 2008. Andriotis, A., Gravaises, M. and Arcoumanis, C.
Vortex flow and cavitation in diesel injector nozzles,
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol 610, pp195–215, 2008
Acronyms
Chemical substances
AIP
Air independent propulsion
CH4Methane
AUV
Autonomous underwater vehicle
CO2
CIMAC
International Council on Combustion Engines
H2Hydrogen
CMAL
Caledonian Marine Assets Ltd
H2OWater
DC
Direct current
NOX
Oxides of nitrogen
Arcoumanis et al. 2008. Arcoumanis, C., Bae, C., Crookes, R. and
Kinoshita, E. The potential of di-methyl ether (DME) as an
alternative fuel for compression-ignition engines: A review.
Fuel 87 (2008) pp1014–1030
DFDE
Dual fuel diesel-electric [propulsion systems]
SOX
Oxides of sulphur
DME
Di-methyl ether
ThThorium
BP 2012. Statistical Review of World Energy 2012. BP 2012
DNV
Det Norske Veritas
235UUranium isotope 235
dwtDeadweight [of a ship]
Carbon dioxide
YBCOYttrium-Barium-Copper-Oxide
ECA
Emission control area
EEDI
Environmental energy design index
Units
EEOI
Energy efficiency operational index
barbar [Pressure:1 bar = 0.9869 Standard Atmospheres]
EGR
Exhaust gas recirculation
CCentigrade
EU
European Union
cStcentistokes [Kinematic viscosity: 1cSt = 1m2/s]
FAME
Fatty acid methyl esters
hhour
GT
Gross tonnage
HzHertz [Cycles/second]
HFO
Heavy fuel oil
JJoules [Energy: 1 Joule = 1 Newton.m]
IAEA
International Atomic Energy Authority
KKelvin [Absolute temperature: 1 ºK = -273.15 ºC]
ICAO
International Civil Aviation Organisation
mmetre [1m = 1000 mm]
IEEC
International Energy Efficiency Certificate
mmmillimetres
IMO
International Maritime Organisation
MPaMegapascals [1Pa = 1 N/m2 ==> 1MPa = 106 N/m2]
LNG
Liquid natural gas
MWeMegawatts electrical
LPG
Liquid petroleum gas
NNewton [Force: 1 N = 0.10197 kilograms force (kgf)]
MARPOLMarine Pollution Convention [IMO]
nm
Nautical mile
MCFCMolten carbonate fuel cell
pH
Logarithmic measure of acidity [pH=1 Acid; pH=12 Alkali]
MCRMaximum continuous rating [of an engine]
ppm
parts per million
MEPCMarine Environmental Protection Committee [IMO]
rpm
revolutions per minute
MHDMagnetohydrodynamic
ssecond
PAFC
Phosphoric acid fuel cell
shp
PEMFC
Proton exchange membrane fuel cell
VVolt
P&I
Protection and indemnity [Insurance clubs]
WWatt [Power: 1W = 1 Joule/second]
PM
Particulate matter
PWR
Pressurised water reactor
Common marine terms used in the report
rms
Royal Mail Steamer
SBI
Subsidiary Body for Implementation
Auxiliary power Power used for support systems on board and
cargo handling.
SBSTA
Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice
SCR
Selective catalytic reduction
SEEMP
Ship energy efficiency management plan
SMR
Small modular reactor
SOFC
Solid oxide fuel cell
SOLAS
Safety of Life at Sea Convention [IMO]
ss
Steam ship
STCW
Standards of Training, Certification and Watch-keeping
teu
Twenty-foot equivalent [container] units
USUnited States of America
VLCCVery large crude carrier
shaft horse power
Bunker fuel
The fuel used for conversion into energy for
propulsion or auxiliary purposes.
Bunkering
The process of fuelling a ship.
Deadweight
The difference between the weight of water
displaced by the ship and its lightweight .
Displacement
The amount of water displaced by the ship.
[Archimedes’ Principle]
Draught
The distance from the waterline to the lowest
point of the keel.
Gross tonnage Is a measure of the overall size (volume) of a
ship, whereas net tonnage is a measure of the
useful capacity of a ship. Both are determined
by the International Convention on the Tonnage
Measurement of Ships.
Lightweight
Trim
76 Royal Academy of Engineering
The weight of the complete ship but with no crew,
passengers, baggage, stores, fuel, water or cargo
on board.
The inclination of the ship as measured between
the difference in the forward and aft draughts in
calm water.
Bunkerworld 2012. Bunkerworld Index, 22nd October 2012
Carlton 2012. Carlton, J.S. Marine Propellers and Propulsion.
Butterworth-Heinemann, 3rd Edition,
ISBN 978-0-08-097123-0, 2012
Christe 1981. Christie, A.O., Hull roughness and its control. Marintech
Conference, Shanghai, China, 1981
CIMAC, 2011. Guidelines for Ignition and Combustion Quality,
CIMAC, 2011
Committee on Climate Change 2011. Review of UK Shipping
Emissions, November 2011.
Cooper 2012. Cooper, Captain N. View from the Bridge: The dangers
of under powering. 3rd Ship Propulsion Conference, Trans
I.MarEST, London. November 2012
DfT. UK transport greenhouse gas emissions. Factsheets, DfT
Jakobsen 2012. S.B. Jakobsen Fuel Optimisation on 2-Stroke Engines,
3rd Propulsion Conf., Trans IMarEST, London 2012
Lamb 1948. Lamb, J. The burning of boiler fuels in marine diesel
engines. Trans IMarE, Vol.LX, No 1. (1948)
Lambert, A. 2008. Admirals. Faber & Faber.
ISBN 978-0-571-23156-0
Larminie and Dicks, 2000.Larminie, J. and Dicks Fuel cell systems
explained. Wiley, Chichester ISBN 0 471 49026 1
Lloyd’s Register 2011. Bio-fuel Trials on Seagoing Container Vessel.
Maersk-Lloyd’s Register-Shell Research Consortium SMIG
09004, Lloyd’s Register, July 2011
Lloyd’s Register. 2012. Lloyd’s Register LNG Bunkering
Infrastructure Study. Lloyd’s Register, London February
2012.
Loginow A.W., 1989, Stress Corrosion Cracking of Steel in Liquefied
Ammonia Service – A Recapitulation, http://www.
nationalboard.org/Index.aspx?pageID=182
MacKay 2009. MacKay, D. Sustainable Energy-Without the Hot Air.
ISBN 078-0-9544529-3-3
MacKay 2011. MacKay, D. Lecture to the Royal Academy of
Engineering’s Working Group. 2011
DNV, 2012. Fuel cells for ships: Research and Innovation, Position
Paper 13, DNV Oslo, 2012. http://www.dnv.com/binaries/
fuel%20cell%20pospaper%20final_tcm4-525872.pdf
MOL, 2004. MOL 2004 Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and
Transport (Japan): The Survey on Transport Energy
2001/2002 MOL(Japan): Environmental and Social Report
2004
Dundee 2007. The Uranium Sector – Primary Supply Fundamentals:
A Re-Examination. Dundee Securities Corporation,
August 30, 2007
Pomeroy, R.V. 2010. 250 Years of Marine Technology Development.
Proc. Lloyd’s Register Technology Days 2010. Lloyd’s
Register, London
EC 2002-2006. European Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Projects
2002–2006. European Commission Brussels.ftp://ftp.cordis.
europa.eu/pub/fp7/energy/docs/hydrogen_synopses_
en.pdf
Rice 1961. Rice, W.A. US Patent 2997013, 22 August 1961
Fairplay 2010. World Fleet Statistics 2010. IHS Fairplay, Redhill
Fort 2011. Fort. E. Sustainable Marine Power – The METHAPU
Project. Proc Lloyd’s Register Technology Days,
Lloyd’s Register, London. 2011
Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2012. Shale gas
extraction in the UK: a review of hydraulic fracturing.
The Royal Society & Royal Academy of Engineering, London
June 2012
Fraunhofer 2012. Keeping ship hulls free of marine organisms.
Fraunhofer Inst. 2012
Royal Society, 2012. People and the Planet.
The Royal Society, Report. April 2012
Green Ship of the Future Project, 2012. Klimt-Møllenbach, C. 3rd
Ship Propulsion Symposium, Trans IMarEST, London, 2012.
www.greenship.org
Stanford 1. http://me.stanford.edu/research/centers/ahpcrc/
Project1_6.html
Greig 2002. Greig, A. Fuel cells and issues for their use in warships.
J. Marine Design and Operations, Proc.IMarEST Part B, No3.
pp9–20. 2001. ISSN 1476-1556
Hill et al. 2012. Hill, Sir R., Hodge, C.G. and Gibbs, T.
The potential of the molten salt reactor for warship
propulsion. Trans INEC, IMarEST, Edinburgh, 2012
IDTechEx 2011. Advanced Energy Storage Technologies: Patent
Trends and Company Positioning. http://www.idtechex.com/
research/reports/advanced-energy-storage-technologiespatent-trends-and-company-positioning-000271.asp
Royal Academy of Engineering. 2009. Synthetic Biology: scope,
applications and implications. The Royal Academy of
Engineering, London May 2009
Stanford 2. http://npl-web.stanford.edu/archive/all-electronbattery/
Stopford, M. 2012. Engineering Change in the Merchant Fleet.
Address to the Royal Academy of Engineering, London.
10th October 2012
Troberg, 2012. Troberg, M. 3rd Ship Propulsion Conference,
Trans IMarEST. London, November 2012
TICA 2012, Turbine Inlet Cooling Association,
http://turbineinletcooling.org/intro.html
IEEE. http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/green-tech/advancedcars/world-lithium-reserves-and-exports
Veldhuis, I., 2007, Application of Hydrogen Marine Systems
in High-speed sea container transport, Eng.D Thesis,
University of Southampton. http://eprints.soton.
ac.uk/51284/
IPCC (1995). Working Group I: The Science of Climate Change. IPCC
Second Assessment Report: Climate Change 1995 (SAR)
Wilson, 2012.Wilson, T. 3rd Ship Propulsion Conference,
Trans IMarEST. London, November 2012
Future ship powering options 77
Appendices
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Terms of reference
Membership of the working group
The terms of reference of the Royal Academy of Engineering’s Alternative Methods of
Ship Propulsion Working Group are as follows:
Chairman
1. To assess the future prospects of current methods of merchant ship propulsion in
terms of environmental impacts and sustainability.
Members
Mr J Aldwinkle
Anthem Corporate Finance
2. To explore the feasibility of employing alternative means of propulsion for merchant
ships with particular focus on nuclear power. These alternative means are to be
placed within the contexts of other existing or known potential ship powering
options.
Mr J Anderson
Caledonian Marine Assets
Professor C Arcoumanis FREng
City University London
Mr D Balston
Chamber of Shipping
Mr A Bardot
International P&I Clubs
3. The working group is to comprise representatives from a range of marine and other
related and interested communities based either in the United Kingdom or abroad.
Mr C Beall
Shell Shipping Technology
Mr M Bowker
Institute of Marine Engineering,
Science and Technology
Professor R Bucknall
University College London
5. The scope of the discussions are to include, but not necessarily be limited to, the
technical, operational, commercial, regulatory, risk, legal, environmental, public
acceptability, and health and safety considerations.
Mr W Catford
Surrey University
Mr J Cheetham
Lloyd’s Register
Mr J Clench
City University London
6. Publicly available reports are to be produced at appropriate stages in the work of the
working group.
Mr S Clews
BP Ltd
Mr D Davenport-Jones
American Bureau of Shipping
Mr M Drayton
The Baltic Exchange
Mr A Duncan
Caledonian Marine Assets
Mr M Edmondson
Chubb Insurance
Dr M El-Shanaway
International Atomic Energy Authority
Mr S Firth
MOD(N) Submarine Operating Centre
Mr D Forbes
Rolls Royce plc
Mr A Goldsworth
Rolls Royce plc
Dr A Greig
University College London
Rear Admiral N Guild FREng
Engineering Council
Mr S Hall
American Bureau of Shipping
Mr D Hankey
BAE Systems
Ms E Hauerhof
City University London
Mr V Jenkins
Lloyd’s Register
Mr C Joly
Carnival CTS
4. A broad range of ship types, sizes and trading patterns are to be considered.
7. The governance of the working group is to be vested in an elected Chair and Deputy
Chair in whom and through whom the terms of reference are to be implemented and
publications authorised in accordance with the requirements of the Royal Academy
of Engineering.
78 Royal Academy of Engineering
Professor JS Carlton FREng
City University London
Future ship powering options 79
Appendices
80 Royal Academy of Engineering
Mr G Kirk
IED Nottingham University
Mr R Lockwood
Nuclear Institute
Professor D MacKay FRS
Chief Scientific Advisor, DECC
Dr J Kang
Samsung Heavy Industries Co Ltd
Mr P Nash
Royal Haskoning DHV
Professor M Newby
City University London
Ms P Oldham
Institution of Mechanical Engineers
Mr W Page
Wärtsilä UK Ltd
Mr SM Payne OBE, FREng
Consultant (Chairman of Working Group in 2009)
M J-P Roux
Areva TA
Dr P Sargent
DECC
Mr R Smart
Lloyd’s Register
Mr D Strawford
Carnival CTS
Mr M Tetley
Nuclear Risk Insurers Ltd
Professor S Turnock
University of Southampton
Mr R Vallis
BAE Systems Marine Division
Mr A Walker
Royal Academy of Engineering
Dr A Watt
University of Glasgow and Strathclyde
Mr G Wright
MOD(N) Submarine Operating Centre
Professor P Wrobel FREng
University College London
Appendix 3
Referee and review group
Vice Admiral Sir Robert Hill KBE,FREng
Safety, Reliability and Marine Consultant
Mr B Cerup-Simonsen
Maersk Maritime Technology
Professor D Stapersma
Delft University of Technology
Mr R Taylor FREng
National Nuclear Laboratory
Mr R Vie
Carnival Shipbuilding
Future ship powering options 81
Appendices
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Statement from Vice-President of the European Commission
SiimKallas and EU Commissioner for Climate Action Connie
Hedegaard, October 2012.
A ship systems approach
“Shipping is a global industry and needs global solutions to address its environmental
footprint. As a result, we are all working towards an internationally agreed global
solution to decrease greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The International
Maritime Organisation made a significant and highly welcome step forward in July
2011 with the Energy Efficiency Design Index. But this measure alone – which
is applied only to new ships from 2015 – will not be enough to ensure shipping
emissions are reduced fast enough. Discussions about further global measures are
ongoing at IMO level, but we need intermediary steps to quickly deliver emissions
reductions, such as energy efficiency measures also for existing ships.
At EU level, we consider several options, including market-based mechanisms.
A simple, robust and globally-feasible approach towards setting a system for
monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions based on fuel consumption is
the necessary starting point. This will help make progress at a global level and feed
into the IMO process. It’s therefore our joint intention to pursue such a monitoring,
reporting and verification system in early 2013. At the same time, we will continue
the debate with stakeholders on which measure can successfully address the EU’s
greenhouse gas reduction objectives.
The shipping industry itself is best placed to take the lead in delivering fast and
effective greenhouse gas emission reductions – thereby cutting cost and making the
sector fit for the future. The Commission is ready to play its part, in the EU and at
IMO level.”
One starting point for a ship systems approach is
to consider the plant requirements and undertake
a stakeholder mapping exercise. However, the ship
owner is only one of a complex network of stakeholders
relating to the ship and its operation and their collective
desires and requirements have to be relaxed such that
a common perspective is reached. Capturing the views
of these bodies can be difficult, but if it is not done
effectively then key requirements may be missed and,
if significant, there is a high probability that the ship
may be unable to effectively trade.
Safety
Financial costs
Market influences
Stakeholder requirements
Technical development risks
Management understanding
Warranty and servicing costs
Legal and statutory implications
Public liability and insurance costs
The mode of operation required will determine a ship’s
specific design requirements. This will impose different
requirements on the ship’s subsystems, including the
prime source of power. These requirements, in turn,
will be heavily dependent upon the meta-solution,
including the routes and the cargos being shipped as
well as the sea states and other external factors. To
then move from a requirements specification to the
system solution and integrate the various technologies
effectively, a functional understanding of the system is
needed. This principally separates the various functions
and shows the required essential flow of information
between them. When complete, the intended function
of the system can then be understood and used as a
framework for the ship design process, after which the
requirements for the various subsystems of the ship
can be defined from the functional model. To improve
the understanding of the entire ship system, sensitivity
analyses can then be undertaken.
There are different types of risk: human risk;
technological risk; process risk and financial risk.
Technical risk relates to the deployment of novel or
variations of proven technology and the consequent
availability of the ship to undertake its commercial
role. Each of these risk elements has to be considered
separately and uncertainties associated with each risk
category identified.
When a departure is made from conventional modes of
propulsion, increased attention should be paid to the
system reliability and, by implication, its availability.
Furthermore, it needs to be recognised that costs
for design changes generally increase significantly
between each of the project stages. However, the
quality of data and with it increased certainty, during a
design and production exercise tends to increase as the
project progresses. Therefore, in order to manage risk
throughout the life cycle it is necessary to identify risks,
then quantify those risks and communicate them.
Table A5.1 Risk factors in new propulsion developments
Failure mode and effect analysis is frequently helpful
in de-risking proposed conceptual designs, given that
it is executed competently. Failure in this context is
formally defined as an unplanned transition to a state in
which the system either cannot perform at all or cannot
properly perform its intended function: both being
potentially dangerous. To consider a failure as a point
event which occurs at a well-defined instant of time is
frequently a serious oversimplification. Whenever there
is a steady degradation of performance together with
an arbitrary criterion of failure, appreciable information
may be lost by studying only the time to failure.
However, for high-integrity systems actual failure may
be so rare that it will not provide useful information. In
this context, Weibull lifetime modelling and Bayesian
statistical approaches can be helpful and from these a
design for reliability process can be defined.
The conclusion of this process is that the solution
may appear to a ship owner to be what was originally
desired, but having been through a systems
engineering process ensures that it generally satisfies
all stakeholder requirements.
The range of risks associated with the development
of novel forms of propulsion in merchant ships can be
appreciated from Table A5.1.
82 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 83
Appendices
Half Life
Appendix 6
Further aspects relating to nuclear
merchant ship propulsion
Fission process
Nuclear fission is induced when a free thermal neutron
is absorbed in a large atom such as 235U or 239Pu.
Absorption of this type causes instability and can set
up vibrations within the nucleus which cause it to
become distended to the point where it splits apart
under mutual electrostatic repulsion of the parts.
If this happens, the atom splits into fragments and
energy is released. In the case of 235U, if a free neutron
is absorbed into an atom, the 235U is converted into
236
U which is highly unstable because of the neutron
to proton ratio. Fissionable nuclei break-up occurs in
a number of different ways: indeed the 235U nucleus
may break up in some 40 or so different ways when
it absorbs a thermal neutron. Typically, this might be
to split into two fragments, 140Xe and 94Sr as well as
emitting two neutrons: alternatively, the split may take
the form of 147La and 87Br fragments plus two neutrons.
All of the fission fragments are initially radioactive and
the majority then undergo a decay process to stable
daughter elements. For example, the 140Xe and 94Sr
fragments are unstable when formed and, therefore,
undergo beta decay. During this decay process the
fragments emit an electron each after which they both
become stable. The emitted two or three neutrons
which themselves, after having their speed and energy
moderated, may be captured by other 235U nuclei in an
ongoing process called a chain reaction. Simultaneously
with the formation of the emission fragments is the
emission of gamma rays.
The simultaneous and progressive fission of a large
number of atoms therefore creates a very large number
of fission products which are highly radioactive isotopes
of many varied and different elements, all of which,
as soon as they are created, start to decay, giving
off energy and radiation in the form of beta particles
(electrons) and gamma rays. The fragments go through
several stages of decay before becoming more-or-less
stable elements. Quite soon after becoming critical and
starting operation, the reactor core contains more than
200 radioactive species (radionuclides).
Thus energy in the form of heat and radiation is
created not only by the fission chain reaction itself, but
continues to be given off after the reactor is shut down
by the insertion of control rods which soak up neutrons
and stop the chain reaction. The energy of decaying
fission products is known as decay heat.
Fuel enrichment
In PWR reactors only a small percentage of naturally
occurring uranium is fissionable, 235U, which implies
that uranium has to be enriched in its 235U component.
While it is possible to achieve virtually any level of
enrichment that is desired, uranium for use in civilian
programmes is generally around 5% of 235U. Levels of
enrichment of 20% or greater are subject to stringent
controls due to international safeguards and nuclear
weapons proliferation concerns and are only used
in specialist or military applications. Furthermore, an
increase in enrichment level, because there is more
Decay heat
Decay heat is the heat produced by the radioactive
decay of radioactive fission products after a
nuclear reactor has been shut down. The amount of
radioactive materials present in the reactor at the
time of shutdown is dependent on the power levels
at which the reactor operated and the amount of
time spent at those power levels. Typically, the
amount of decay heat that will be present in the
reactor immediately following shutdown will be
roughly 7% of the power level that the reactor
operated at prior to shutdown,
84 Royal Academy of Engineering
which will decrease to about 2% of the preshutdown power level within the first hour after
shutdown and to 1% within the first day. Decay
heat will then continue to decrease, but it will
decrease at a much slower rate. Decay heat will
be significant weeks and even months after the
reactor is shut down, thus the need for ongoing
reactor cooling. Hence, nuclear powered ships , like
nuclear power stations, require auxiliary generated
electrical power for reactor cooling or general ship
services when the reactor is shut down.
Radioactive half life is defined as the time it takes
for the amount of a radionuclide to fall to one half
of its original value. Take for example tritium,
which has a radioactive half-life of 12.3 years
and emits a very low energy beta particle when it
undergoes radioactive decay and transforms to
stable, non-radioactive helium. If we originally
take 1 million atoms of tritium (3H), after 12.3
years (half life) we would have 500,000 atoms of
radioactive tritium left, with the other 500,000
atoms having radioactively decayed to nonradioactive helium (3He).
fissionable material, does not imply that the fuel will
have a longer life in a reactor since other factors such as
corrosion resistance or fuel element fatigue influence
life expectation. Therefore, it is likely that a standard
civil fuel of around 5% enrichment would be used in
any merchant shipping application. Although not a
CO2-producing energy source, nuclear power produces
waste products because following fission a number of
radioactive products remain; many of which have long
half-lives requiring a considerable period of storage
before they cease to pose a radiological hazard.
heat and the cooling system needs high reliability.
Furthermore, due to fission product activity, systems
and components containing fuel salt are highly
radioactive and remote maintenance equipment is
needed. This also applies to the off-gas and drain
tank systems. Additionally, the bare graphite used in
the core is susceptible to distortion and damage in
a high neutron flux. Finally, the fuel in a molten salt
reactor is dispersed and this complicates the shielding
requirements which are notably different to those of
a PWR. The requirement to also thermally insulate the
hot compartments exacerbates the naval architect’s
problems.
Molten salt reactors
Molten salt reactors operate at atmospheric pressure
and in this way avoid accident sequences that with
other types of reactor originate with low pressure.
The molten salt reactor operates at high temperature
which, with appropriate generating plant, gives high
thermal efficiency and high power to weight and size
ratios. With regard to the high temperatures, there
is a large (≈500 ºC) margin between the operating
temperature and the boiling point of the fuel salt,
allowing time to react in the event of loss of decay
heat cooling. It is inherently stable and load following,
with a quick response.
There is an abundant world supply of thorium, which
is used in the reactor in its natural state, requiring no
separation or pre-use processing. The earth’s crust
contains three times as much thorium as U238.
Moreover, the fuel salt can be contaminated so as
to confer virtually insurmountable resistance to
proliferation and its use in nuclear weapons.
After reprocessing, the wastes are predominantly
short-lived fission products with relatively short halflives. In a waste repository, safe radiation levels would
be reached in 300 years, as opposed to the tens of
thousands of years of actinides with much longer
half-lives.
Set against these advantages there are some
disadvantages of this technology. Pipes and
components comprising the salt systems must be
maintained above the high melting temperature of
the salt until emptied by draining to the drain tank.
Isolating the ship’s structure and other compartments
from the high-temperature systems and compartments
is arguably the main problem facing the ship designer.
Also, fuel salt drained from the reactor into the
drain tank requires to be cooled to remove decay
Ship concept design
Nuclear propulsion, if applied to merchant ships,
would permit further concepts in ship design to be
contemplated. For example, because nuclear fuel
is relatively cheap, the conventional operating cost
implications of high-speed operations do not apply.
It might, therefore, become desirable to operate a
container ship at 35 knots or a tanker at 21 knots in
contrast to the lower conventional speeds. Such a
concept might save the deployment of one ship on
a liner route when moving a fixed volume or weight
of cargo. Alternatively, it could give flexibility with a
full complement of ships to accommodate predicted
increasing trade volumes. A further design dimension,
due to the small mass and volume of fuel consumed,
may give scope for increased cargo deadweight
capacity or, alternatively, provide greater flexibility in
hull design to satisfy other constraints which might not
normally be able to be relaxed. If the former of these
options were taken, the propeller power density might
become too large for an acceptable propulsion solution
using a single screw. This might dictate that a twin or
triple screw option was selected and while increasing
building costs, might have helpful steering or propulsion
redundancy aspects.
As with many other aspects of the design process for
a nuclear-propelled ship, the design of the control
system and the system integrity would form a central
feature of the safety case. Indeed, it would be a
complex matter to construct a fully integrated safety
case for a ship-borne reactor plant and its supporting
shore infrastructure to support a nuclear powered
merchant ship. This is because a mobile reactor plant
needs to be able to operate independently at sea and
in at least two different dry-docks or ports: probably
more if the ship undertook current commercial trading
Future ship powering options 85
Appendices
86 Royal Academy of Engineering
used nuclear fuel they would be more demanding.
Again, these issues could be simplified if the
advantages of a plant modular approach were adopted
with complex work undertaken off-ship or even offsite.
Refuelling and major maintenance and repair:
Currently available reactor plants for merchant
ships would require refuelling at regular intervals.
To minimise ship downtime, these periods might
be planned to coincide with routine dockings and
major maintenance, inspection or repairs. The shore
infrastructure requirements would be similar to those
for the build and commissioning phases, however, due
to the increased radiological hazard associated with
Figure A6.1 shows the historical trend in uranium
oxide prices, from which some volatility can be seen.
However, only around 52% of the cost of uranium fuel
comprises the cost of uranium, to which enrichment
and fabrication costs of approximately 26% and
7% respectively must be added: the balance of the
total cost being conversion and waste processing
and storage costs (Dundee 2007). Figure A6.2 records
the historical trends in electricity productions costs
•Coal
•Gas
•Nuclear
•Petroleum
140
120
100
80
Decommissioning: The principle of designing reactor
plant with decommissioning in mind should apply.
However, by the time marine plant decommissioning
and disposal are likely to become issues for nuclearpowered merchant ships, effective arrangements
for land-based nuclear plants may be in place. When
these have been established they could absorb the
relatively small contribution from the maritime domain,
particularly if modular construction and deconstruction
is employed. If repositories have not been established
by then, the currently established plan of holding spent
fuel in surface cooling ponds could be utilised.
A number of dismantling options are available. The
immediate dismantling and safe storage options have
been used, in part, for the Otto Hahn and Savannah
respectively. Indeed, the Otto Hahn, following its
successful period as a nuclear-propelled merchant
ship demonstrator, went on to have a long career as a
diesel-propelled cargo ship.
Cost models
12
10
8
6
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
Jan 1
2005
Jan 1
2010
0
1998
0
1997
2
20
1995
40
1996
4
60
The escape of radioactive particles from the core
constitutes a nuclear accident, which may be quite
small, easily contained and relatively harmless; or
large, as in the cases of Chernobyl and Fukushima. A
nuclear accident could result from core damage, such
as distortion or melting, as a result of failure of the
systems which take away the heat from fission and the
decay heat after shutdown. Hence the safety case for
a nuclear power plant not only demonstrates that the
core can be taken critical; remain under control while
operating and safely shut down, but also demonstrates
that throughout the whole of the life of the core,
cooling systems will be available to take away both the
heat when it is operating and the decay when it is shut
down.
Build and commissioning: Although aspects of
conventional marine plant require clean conditions
for assembly, the requirements for nuclear plant in
cleanliness, quality assurance, procedural control and
inspection would be demanding. This implies fabricating
as much of the reactor plant as possible in dedicated
manufacturing facilities offsite and then installing
completed modules: this again might favour integral
reactor plant designs and small modular reactors. The
presence of nuclear fuel onsite requires facilities to be
designed to consider a range of external hazards, from
earthquake to aircraft impact. Furthermore, reactor
plant commissioning would require high-integrity
electrical and cooling water supplies, facilities to
handle radioactive discharges, and robust emergency
response arrangements. The latter requirements would
be simplified if the shipyard was distant from large
centres of population. Within the shipyard, docks, tidal
berths and cranes would also require safety cases,
and special arrangements would be needed to ensure
safe exit from the shipyard. Throughout the build
and commissioning a significant level of regulatory
oversight would be expected.
Operation: There would need to be some interaction
with shore infrastructure whenever cargo is loaded or
unloaded and, more particularly, if the reactor had to
be shut down for unplanned repair. The repair facilities
employed would have to consider the use of highintegrity power supplies, cooling water supplies to
remove decay heat, and the ability to handle low-level
radioactive discharges. The operation of nuclearpowered merchant ships in ports close to centres of
population will require appropriate nuclear emergency
response plans and arrangements to be put in place
which may, in certain quarters, have some negative
effects on public perception. Entry into navigationally
difficult port approaches would also require appropriate
assistance and emergency response arrangements.
Indeed the operation of LPG carriers already addresses
similar issues. The use of offshore terminals might
form the basis of an appropriate goods distribution
solution but would add cost to the transportation chain.
Clearly, it would be desirable to use ports remote from
the general public access and to design reactor plants
to minimise dependence on shore facilities when shut
down for repairs. Additionally, within the operational
framework there would be a need to introduce security
measures to protect nuclear material on a mobile
platform.
Jan 1
2000
Radiation is a hazard to health, so the core of a nuclear
reactor, where the fission takes place, must be shielded
to prevent radiation reaching the operators and the
general public. Furthermore, barriers must be provided
to ensure that highly radioactive particles stay within
the core. In a nuclear power station, the final barrier to
the escape of radioactive particles to the environment
is the containment building housing the nuclear plant.
Manufacture: Special facilities would be required for
the manufacture of reactor plant components, and in
the case of the reactor core these facilities would be
need to be within a licensed site. The factories already
in place for civil nuclear programmes could, however,
most likely be used.
Safety and life cycle issues
Design: A design assessment would be required to
justify the intended type of reactor plant to be used in
the ship.
Jan 1
1995
Within the space available on a large merchant ship it
may be possible to include many of the support systems
that are required when a reactor is shut down for repair
or refuelling. For example, alternative cooling water
systems for decay heat removal and high integrity
electrical power supplies could be supplied. However,
with a small number of shore facilities supporting a
relatively large number of ships, it may be more costeffective to install these facilities on the dockside. By
adopting a modular approach to nuclear plant design,
typical of small modular reactors, work on a complete
reactor plant module could be carried out at specialist
facilities offsite, thereby easing dockside nuclear safety
requirements. Clearly, a system engineering approach
is required to consider these and other issues, thereby
ensuring an optimum design solution for both merchant
ship and shore infrastructure.
Nuclear safety considerations will drive different shore
infrastructure requirements from those currently in
place for conventionally propelled merchant ships.
These would impact on factories, shipyards, ports
and dockyards throughout the whole life cycle of
the nuclear propulsion plant and, in so doing, would
be a major cost driver for nuclear powered merchant
shipping. There would be a number of life cycle
requirements that would need to be satisfied:
Uranium oxide price (USD/lb)
patterns. However, to minimise complexity, duplication
of systems and cost, it would be important that the
designs of the reactor plant and shore infrastructure
are coherent. In particular, a key objective for the mobile
reactor plant would be to minimise the nuclear safety
demands placed on the shore infrastructure.
Figure A6.1 Historical trends in uranium oxide prices
Figure A6.2 US Electricity production costs 1995–mid 2008
[InfoMine.com]
[NEI Global Energy Decisions]
Future ship powering options 87
Appendices
from four fuel sources. Nuclear, along with coal, has a
record of being the cheapest and also is subject to less
volatility in production costs that other fuel sources.
Long-term users of nuclear fuels usually enter into
long-term contracts with producers at term prices and
in recent years the term prices have shown significant
reductions against the spot prices. These contracts are
typically three to five years in duration and use a variety
of pricing mechanisms: fixed price contracts with
escalation clauses linked to market indicators being but
one example.
In the marine context there are many variables involved
in the business and operational models underpinning
ship propulsion business cases. In the context of
fuel prices as oil prices change, the cost of operating
conventionally propelled vessels varies accordingly,
subject to the provisions of hedging arrangements,
whereas Figure A6.2 demonstrates that the electricity
production cost of running a nuclear generation
plant has remained relatively stable over the last 12
to 13 years. Furthermore, the current term contract
durations used in the land-based industries fit well with
conventional marine survey and major maintenance
cycles and from which similar fuel cost benefits might
be derived.
Insurance
The insurance of nuclear risks is subject to the same
principles as other insurance. However, the insurance
of nuclear risk is different from other insurance risks
because, however improbable, a reactivity excursion
or the failure to prevent overheating by removing
decay heat can result in core melting. This may result
in extensive plant damage and external radioactive
contamination if other barriers are breached. This
entrains a series of issues which can be summarised as
being:
• Events of potentially very high severity, but low
frequency.
• A low number of nuclear risks having a premium in
2010 of the order of $800M globally which is about
0.04% of the total global premium.
• There is insufficient actuarial data upon which to
base an idea of the risk; there are only theoretical
calculations as the industry loss record is good.
• The attendant risk of accumulation of financial
exposure.
Appendix 7
International atomic energy principles and
requirements
The fundamental safety objective is to protect people
and the environment from harmful effects of ionising
radiation.
Principles
To achieve the fundamental safety objective there are
ten principles [A7.1] which are required to be applied.
1. Responsibility for safety
The prime responsibility for safety must rest with
the person or organisation responsible for facilities
and activities that give rise to radiation risks.
2. Role of government
An effective legal and governmental framework for
safety, including an independent regulatory body,
must be established and sustained.
3. Leadership and management for safety
Effective leadership and management for safety
must be established and sustained in organisations
concerned with, and facilities and activities that
give rise to, radiation risks.
4. Justification of facilities and activities
Facilities and activities that give rise to radiation
risks must yield an overall benefit.
5. Optimisation of protection
Protection must be optimised to provide the highest
level of safety that can be reasonably achieved.
6. Limitation of risks to individuals
Measures for controlling radiation risks must ensure
that no individual bears an unacceptable risk of
harm.
7. Protection of present and future generations
People and the environment, present and future,
must be protected against radiation risks.
8. Prevention of accidents
All practical efforts must be made to prevent and
mitigate nuclear or radiation accidents.
9. Emergency preparedness and response
Arrangements must be made for emergency
preparedness and response for nuclear or radiation
incidents.
88 Royal Academy of Engineering
10.Protective actions to reduce existing or
unregulated radiation risks
Protective actions to reduce existing or unregulated
radiation risks must be justified and optimised.
Requirements
The ten principles that are set out above in order to
achieve the fundamental safety objective lead, inter
alia, to the requirement for a safety assessment
to be carried out. The following 24 requirements
(A7.2), therefore, are directed towards the proper
achievement of the safety assessment.
1. Graded approach
A graded approach shall be used in determining the
scope and level of detail of the safety assessment
carried out in a particular state for any particular
facility or activity, consistent with the magnitude of
the possible radiation risks arising from the facility or
activity.
Overall requirements
2. Scope of the safety assessment
A safety assessment shall be carried out for all
applications of technology that give rise to radiation
risks; that is, for all types of facilities and activities.
3. Responsibility for the safety assessment
The responsibility for carrying out the safety
assessment shall rest with the responsible
legal person; that is, the person or organisation
responsible for the facility or activity.
4. Purpose of the safety assessment
The primary purpose of the safety assessment
shall be to determine whether an adequate level of
safety has been achieved for the facility or activity
and whether basic safety objectives and safety
criteria established by the designer, the operating
organisation and the regulatory body, in compliance
with the requirements for protection and safety
as established in the International Basic Safety
Standards for Protection against Ionising Radiation
and the Safety of Radiation Sources (A7.3), have
been fulfilled.
Future ship powering options 89
Appendices
5. Preparation for the safety assessment
The first stage of carrying out the safety
assessment shall be to ensure that the necessary
resources, information, data, analytical tools as well
as safety criteria are identified and are available.
6. Assessment of the possible radiation risks
The possible radiation risks associated with the
facility or activity shall be identified and assessed.
7. Assessment of safety functions
All safety functions associated with a facility or
activity shall be specified and assessed.
8. Assessment of site characteristics
An assessment of the site characteristics relating to
the safety of the facility or activity shall be carried
out.
9. Assessment of the provision for radiation
protection
It shall be determined in the safety assessment for
a facility or activity whether adequate measures are
in place to protect people and the environment from
harmful effects of ionising radiation.
10.Assessment of engineering aspects
It shall be determined in the safety assessment
whether a facility or activity uses, to the extent
practicable, structures, systems and components of
robust and proven design.
11.Assessment of human factors
Human interactions with the facility or activity
shall be addressed in the safety assessment, and
it shall be determined whether the procedures and
safety measures that are provided for all round
operational activities, in particular those that are
necessary for implementation of the operational
limits and conditions, and those that are required
in response to anticipated operational occurrences
and accidents, ensure an adequate level of safety.
12.Assessment of safety over the lifetime of a
facility or activity
The safety assessment shall cover all the stages in
the lifetime of a facility or activity in which there are
possible radiation risks.
90 Royal Academy of Engineering
Defence in depth and safety margins
13.Assessment of defence in depth
It shall be determined in the assessment of defence
in depth whether adequate provisions have been
made at each of the levels of defence in depth.
Safety Analysis
14.Scope of the safety analysis
The performance of a facility or activity in all
operational states and, as necessary, in the postoperational phase shall be assessed in the safety
analysis.
15.Deterministic and probabilistic approaches
Both deterministic and probabilistic approaches
shall be included in the safety analysis.
16.Criteria for judging safety
Criteria for judging safety shall be defined for the
safety analysis.
17.Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis
Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis shall be
performed and taken into account in the results of
the safety analysis and conclusions drawn from it.
Management, use and Maintenance
of the Safety Assessment
22.Use of the safety assessment
The processes by which the safety assessment
is produced shall be planned, organised, applied,
audited and reviewed.
23.Use of the safety assessment
The results of the safety assessment shall be
used to specify the programme for maintenance,
surveillance and inspection; to specify the
procedures to be put in place for all operational
activities significant to safety and for responding to
anticipated operational occurrences and accidents;
to specify the necessary competences for the
staff involved in the facility or activity and to make
decisions in an integrated, risk-informed approach.
References for Appendix 7
7.1 Fundamental Safety Principles:
Safety Fundamentals. IAEA Safety Standards Series
No. SF-1, IAEA, Vienna, 2006.
7.2 Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities.
General Safety Requirements Part 4, No. GSR Part 4,
IAEA, Vienna, 2009.
7.3 International Basic Safety Standards for the
Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the
Safety of Radiation Sources.
IAEA Safety Series No115, IAEA, Vienna, 2006.
24.Maintenance of the safety assessment
The safety assessment shall be periodically
reviewed and updated.
18.Use of computer codes
Any calculation method and computer codes used
in the safety analysis shall undergo verification and
validation.
19.Use of operating experience data
Data on operational safety performance shall be
collected and assessed.
Documentation
20.Documentation of the safety assessment
The results and findings of the safety assessment
shall be documented.
Independent verification
21.Independent verification
The operating organisation shall carry out an
independent verification of the safety assessment
before it is used by the operating organisation or
submitted to the regulatory body.
Future ship powering options 91
Appendices
Appendix 8
Appendix 9
The energy efficiency design index
Calendar for main emission legislation events 2010–2020
The computation of the actual EEDI for a specific ship
design, for which the Index applies, is achieved through
the use of following relationship which embraces the
four CO2 potentially producing components in the
numerator while in the denominator is the product of
ship speed and capacity. It will also be seen that in both
the numerator and denominator there are number
correction factors included which adjust the value of
the Index for particular circumstances. The actual EEDI
is then given by:
Actual EEDI =
M
nME
π ∑
j= l
fj (
i= l
M
nPTI
π∑
PME(i) CFME(i) SFCME(i))+(PAE CFAE SFCAE*)+((
j= l
fj
i= l
nef f
∑
PPTI(i) –
i= l
fef f(i) PAEef f(i) )CFAE SFCAE)–(
nef f
∑
i= l
1 July 2010
Tier II NOX limit for new engines [Global]
1 July 2011 US Caribbean Sea ECA adopted at IMO MEPC 62
1 Jan 2012
Cap on sulphur content of fuel(a) 4.50% to 3.50% [Global]
1 Aug 2012
North American ECA took effect SOX and NOX(b) [Local]
1 Jan 2014
US Caribbean Sea ECA takes effect SOX and NOX(b) [Local]
1 July 2015
ECA cap on sulphur content of fuel 1.00% to 0.10% [Local]
1 Jan 2016 Tier III NOX limit for new engines NOX ECA’s only [Local]
1 Jan 2020(d)
Cap on sulphur content of fuel 3.50% to 0.50% [Global]
(c)
fef f(i) Pef f(i)CFME SFCME )
fi .CDWT . .Vref . fW
nPTI
is the number of power take-in systems.
PAE
is the ship’s auxiliary power requirements
under normal seagoing conditions. [kW]
Notes
aSOX emissions are being controlled by reducing the percentage of sulphur in the fuel.
It is permissible to use fuel with a higher sulphur content than the local limit so long
is it can shown that by using some appropriate technology the SOX content of the
exhaust is no higher than if fuel was burnt that is within the local limit.
PEAeff
is the auxiliary power reduction due to the use
of innovative technologies. [kW]
b At Tier II until 1 Jan 2016 then Tier III.
c Subject to technical review to be concluded no later than 2013; this could be delayed.
Peff
is taken as 75% of the installed power for
each innovative technology that contributes
to the ship’s propulsion. [kW]
d Subject to feasibility review to be completed by 2018.
PME
is the ship’s main engine installed power [kW]
PPTI
is taken as 75% of the installed power for
each power take-in system. For example,
propulsion shaft motors.[kW]
where:
CDWT
capacity is the ship’s capacity measured in
deadweight or gross tonnage at the summer
load line. In the case of container ships this is
taken as 70% of the deadweight. [tonnes].
[MEPC 63/23 Annex 8].
CFAE
is the carbon factor for the auxiliary engine
fuel. [gCO2/gfuel]
CFME
is the carbon factor for the main engine fuel.
[gCO2/gfuel]
EEDI
is the actual energy efficiency design index for
the ship. [gCO2/tonne.nm]
feff
is a correction factor for the availability of
innovative technologies.
fi
is a correction factor for the capacity of ships
with technical or regulatory limitations in
capacity.
fj
is a correction factor for ships having specific
design features: for example, an ice breaker.
fw
is a correction factor for speed reduction due
to representative sea conditions.
M
is the number of propulsion shafts possessed
by the ship.
neff
is the number of innovative technologies
contained within the design.
nME
is the number of main engines installed in the
ship.
92 Royal Academy of Engineering
SFCAE is the specific fuel consumption for the
auxiliary engines as given by the NOX
certification. [g/kWh]
SFCME is the specific fuel consumption for the main
engines as given by the NOX certification.
[g/kWh]
Vref
is the ship speed under ideal sea conditions
when the propeller is absorbing 75% of the
main propulsion engine(s) MCR when the ship
is sailing in deep water.
Future ship powering options 93
Appendices
Appendix 10
Potential applicability of measures and options discussed
Ship typeTanker/Bulk carriers
Container shipsRo/Ro & ferries
Cruise ships
NBESOpNBESOpNBESOpNBESOp
Ship typeGeneral cargo shipsOffshore support vesselsTugs
Fishing vessels
NBESOpNBESOpNBESOpNBESOp
Conventional propulsion options
Conventional propulsion options
Diesel engines incl. modifications
Diesel engines incl. modifications
Biofuels
Biofuels
Natural gas (LNG)
Natural gas (LNG)
Gas turbines
Gas turbines
Other propulsion technology options
Other propulsion technology options
Nuclear
Nuclear
Batteries
Batteries
Fuel cells
Fuel cells
Renewable energy
Renewable energy
Hydrogen
Hydrogen
Anhydrous ammonia
Anhydrous ammonia
Comp air/nitrogen
Comp air/nitrogen
Hybrid propulsion
Hybrid Propulsion
Further propulsion considerations
Further propulsion considerations
Energy-saving devices
Energy-saving devices
Hull optimisation and appendages
Hull optimisation and appendages
Hull coatings
Hull coatings
Hull cleaning
Hull cleaning
Propeller redesign to suit
operational profile
Propeller redesign to suit
operational profile
CRP propulsion
CRP propulsion
Propeller cleaning
Propeller cleaning
Superconducting electric motors
Superconducting electric motors
Weather routing and voyage
planning
Weather routing and voyage
planning
Slow steaming and/or propeller mod.
Slow steaming and/or propeller mod.
Machinery condition monitoring
Machinery condition monitoring
Crew training
Crew training
NB New building
NB New building
ES Existing ship
ES Existing ship
Op Operational measure
Op Operational measure
The above options do not take account of time frame in that some options would have a relatively long lead time; see Figure 5.1.
Additionally, the presence of a shaded block suggests there may be merit in considering these options for many cases of ships
conforming to the general type. The absence of a shaded block does not necessarily imply there is no merit in the option for the
class of ship since many variants, including operational profiles, exists within ship types.
The above options do not take account of time frame in that some options would have a relatively long lead time; see Figure 5.1.
Additionally, the presence of a shaded block suggests there may be merit in considering these options for many cases of ships
conforming to the general type. The absence of a shaded block does not necessarily imply there is no merit in the option for the
class of ship since many variants, including operational profiles, exists within ship types.
94 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 95
96 Royal Academy of Engineering
Future ship powering options 97
As the UK’s national academy for engineering, we bring
together the most successful and talented engineers
from across the engineering sectors for a shared purpose:
to advance and promote excellence in engineering.
The Academy’s work programmes for 2011 to 2015 are
driven by four strategic challenges:
We provide analysis and policy support to promote the
UK’s role as a great place from which to do business.
We take a lead on engineering education and we invest
in the UK’s world class research base to underpin
innovation. We work to improve public awareness and
understanding of engineering. We are a national Academy
with a global outlook.
Foster better education and skills
Royal Academy of Engineering
Prince Philip House
3 Carlton House Terrace
London SW1Y 5DG
Tel: +44 (0)20 7766 0600
www.raeng.org.uk
Registered charity number 293074
Please recycle this brochure
98 Royal Academy of Engineering
Drive faster and more balanced economic growth
Lead the profession
Promote engineering at the heart of society